Tracking Issue for #[track_caller]
on async fn
#110011
Labels
C-tracking-issue
Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature.
T-lang
Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
This is a tracking issue for
#[track_caller]
on async fn.The feature gate
#[feature(async_fn_track_caller)]
for the issue is not implemented yet (#110009)About tracking issues
Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.
Steps
#[track_caller]
on async fn #110009Unresolved Questions
(Copied over from: #87417 (comment))
It's not 100% clear that tracking the poller, rather than the original caller, is the ideal behavior. That said, we may still be able to resolve the question without an RFC.
Arguments in favor of tracking the poller (current behavior):
Arguments in favor of tracking the original caller instead of the poller:
Implementation history
#[track_caller]
on async fns #104219#[track_caller]
back to a no-op unless feature gate is enabled #104741The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: