Skip to content

/rust

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tracking issue for RFC amendment #1384 #30450

Closed
pnkfelix opened this Issue Dec 17, 2015 · 2 comments

Comments

Assignees

@pnkfelix pnkfelix

Labels
B-RFC-approved B-unstable C-tracking-issue
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
4 participants
@pnkfelix @steveklabnik @brson @Mark-Simulacrum
@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

pnkfelix commented Dec 17, 2015 •
edited

Need to implement RFC amendment rust-lang/rfcs#1384 to RFC 550 (macro input future proofing)

  • land amendment with warning for macro definitions that were previously accepted but will error in next cycle
  • after a cycle, promote the warning to an error.

@pnkfelix pnkfelix self-assigned this Dec 17, 2015

@pnkfelix

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Member Author

pnkfelix commented Dec 17, 2015

cc #20563

@pnkfelix pnkfelix referenced this issue Dec 17, 2015

Closed

In macros, `$($x:expr),*` fragments can be used to bypass future-proofing restrictions #25658

@steveklabnik steveklabnik added the B-RFC-approved label Dec 18, 2015

@durka durka referenced this issue Jan 3, 2016

Open

Let expressions be followed by blocks in macro arguments #30679

pnkfelix added a commit to pnkfelix/rust that referenced this issue Jan 4, 2016

@pnkfelix
macro_rules: proper FIRST/FOLLOW computations for checking macro_rule… 
…s validity.

See RFC amendment 1384 and tracking issue 30450:
  rust-lang/rfcs#1384
  rust-lang#30450

Moved old check_matcher code into check_matcher_old

combined the two checks to enable a warning cycle (where we will
continue to error if the two checks agree to reject, accept if the new
check says accept, and warn if the old check accepts but the new check
rejects).
b6793d9

This was referenced Jan 4, 2016

Merged
Closed

pnkfelix added a commit to pnkfelix/rust that referenced this issue Jan 5, 2016

@pnkfelix
macro_rules: proper FIRST/FOLLOW computations for checking macro_rule… 
…s validity.

See RFC amendment 1384 and tracking issue 30450:
  rust-lang/rfcs#1384
  rust-lang#30450

Moved old check_matcher code into check_matcher_old

combined the two checks to enable a warning cycle (where we will
continue to error if the two checks agree to reject, accept if the new
check says accept, and warn if the old check accepts but the new check
rejects).
e335f0f

bors added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 7, 2016

@bors
Auto merge of #30694 - pnkfelix:issue-25658-real-first-follow, r=nrc 
Proper first and follow sets for macro_rules future proofing

implements first stage of RFC amendment 1384; see #30450
cc03014

@pnkfelix pnkfelix referenced this issue Jan 7, 2016

Closed

ICE on macro expansion in nightly, but not beta. #30715

pnkfelix added a commit to pnkfelix/rust that referenced this issue Jan 7, 2016

@pnkfelix
macro_rules: proper FIRST/FOLLOW computations for checking macro_rule… 
…s validity.

See RFC amendment 1384 and tracking issue 30450:
  rust-lang/rfcs#1384
  rust-lang#30450

Moved old check_matcher code into check_matcher_old

combined the two checks to enable a warning cycle (where we will
continue to error if the two checks agree to reject, accept if the new
check says accept, and warn if the old check accepts but the new check
rejects).
076e644

@pnkfelix pnkfelix referenced this issue Jan 8, 2016

Merged

Amend RFC 550 with (expanded) abstract specification rather than algorithm #1384

bors added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 11, 2016

@bors
Auto merge of #30694 - pnkfelix:issue-25658-real-first-follow, r=nrc 
Proper first and follow sets for macro_rules future proofing

implements first stage of RFC amendment 1384; see #30450
8084616

nagisa added a commit to nagisa/rust that referenced this issue Jan 11, 2016

@nagisa
Rollup merge of rust-lang#30694 - pnkfelix:issue-25658-real-first-fol… 
…low, r=nrc

Proper first and follow sets for macro_rules future proofing

implements first stage of RFC amendment 1384; see rust-lang#30450
6d6e831

@pnkfelix pnkfelix referenced this issue Jan 14, 2016

Closed

macro future-proofing regression: `$a:ty [ b ]` is now rejected #30923

@pnkfelix pnkfelix referenced this issue Jun 2, 2016

Merged

Remove the old FOLLOW checking (aka `check_matcher_old`). #33982

@brson brson added the B-unstable label Mar 1, 2017

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum added C-tracking-issue and removed C-enhancement C-feature-request labels Jul 22, 2017

@pnkfelix

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Member Author

pnkfelix commented Oct 24, 2018

The warning was upgraded to an error in #33982.

@pnkfelix pnkfelix closed this Oct 24, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.