Tracking issue for `no_debug` feature

[aturon]

Tracks stabilization of #[no_debug].

[eefriedman]

The #[no_debug] suppresses debug info for the marked function (so the function is always compiled as if -g is turned off).

If we want to let people avoid stepping into a particular function, something like gcc's "artificial" function attribute is a better idea. I can't think of any other good reason to suppress debug info.

If we do decide to stabilize this, we need some checks to make sure the attribute is only applied in places where it's actually supported.

[nrc]

Is anyone using this? What is the motivation for it existing?

Nominating for discussion/FCP (my opinion: deprecate unless someone really wants this).

[jonas-schievink]

A quick GitHub search finds no use of this

[petrochenkov]

Is anyone using this? What is the motivation for it existing?

I use it as a workaround for #35566.

[nikomatsakis]

Hear ye, hear ye! This unstable issue is now entering final comment period with the inclination to deprecate and remove -- basically because nobody seems to really want it.

@rust-lang/lang members, please check off your name to signal agreement. Leave a comment with concerns or objections. Others, please leave comments. Thanks!

• @nikomatsakis
• @nrc
• @aturon
• @eddyb
• @pnkfelix (on vacation)

[alexcrichton]

Deprecated in #37128, so closing.

[SimonSapin]

The deprecation landed on 2017-10-27. Can this feature be removed? (It still has an entry at https://doc.rust-lang.org/unstable-book/language-features/no-debug.html.)

[nikomatsakis]

@SimonSapin do it =)

[nikomatsakis]

(Or someone else :) )