Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Tracking issue for todo! macro #59277

Closed
matklad opened this issue Mar 18, 2019 · 11 comments
Closed

Tracking issue for todo! macro #59277

matklad opened this issue Mar 18, 2019 · 11 comments
Labels
A-macros Area: All kinds of macros (custom derive, macro_rules!, proc macros, ..) B-unstable Blocker: Implemented in the nightly compiler and unstable. C-tracking-issue Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature. disposition-merge This issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it. finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue. T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Comments

@matklad
Copy link
Member

matklad commented Mar 18, 2019 •
edited

This is a tracking issue for todo! macro.

Added in #56348. Feature gate: #![feature(todo_macro)].

When stabilizing, we should adjust documentation for unimplemented! to point towards todo!
@jonas-schievink jonas-schievink added B-unstable Blocker: Implemented in the nightly compiler and unstable. C-tracking-issue Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature. labels Mar 18, 2019
@withoutboats withoutboats added A-macros Area: All kinds of macros (custom derive, macro_rules!, proc macros, ..) T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Mar 18, 2019
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 29, 2019

Anyone wants to FCP for stabilization?

I find this macro so handy I began putting #![feature(todo_macro)] everywhere.

@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented May 8, 2019

cc @alexcrichton --^ ?

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jun 1, 2019

It's been a while -- just a ping in case this slipped through. :)

@matklad
Copy link
Member Author

matklad commented Jun 1, 2019

I guess we should submit stabilization PR and run FCP on that? Note that the PR needs to adjust docs for unimplemented as well. I can send the PR, but not immediately: putting out fires in rust-analyzer :D

@ghost ghost mentioned this issue Jun 15, 2019
Merged
Centril added a commit to Centril/rust that referenced this issue Oct 3, 2019
@Centril
Rollup merge of rust-lang#61879 - stjepang:stabilize-todo, r=withoutb…
25c6376 
…oats

Stabilize todo macro

The `todo!` macro is just another name for `unimplemented!`.

Tracking issue: rust-lang#59277

This PR needs a FCP to merge.

r? @withoutboats
Centril added a commit to Centril/rust that referenced this issue Oct 3, 2019
@Centril
Rollup merge of rust-lang#61879 - stjepang:stabilize-todo, r=withoutb…
cc835db 
…oats

Stabilize todo macro

The `todo!` macro is just another name for `unimplemented!`.

Tracking issue: rust-lang#59277

This PR needs a FCP to merge.

r? @withoutboats
tmandry added a commit to tmandry/rust that referenced this issue Oct 3, 2019
@tmandry
Rollup merge of rust-lang#61879 - stjepang:stabilize-todo, r=withoutb…
2d5f4df 
…oats

Stabilize todo macro

The `todo!` macro is just another name for `unimplemented!`.

Tracking issue: rust-lang#59277

This PR needs a FCP to merge.

r? @withoutboats
tmandry added a commit to tmandry/rust that referenced this issue Oct 3, 2019
@tmandry
Rollup merge of rust-lang#61879 - stjepang:stabilize-todo, r=withoutb…
f7ee31e 
…oats

Stabilize todo macro

The `todo!` macro is just another name for `unimplemented!`.

Tracking issue: rust-lang#59277

This PR needs a FCP to merge.

r? @withoutboats
@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

I don’t have a strong opinion on this one, but since it landed and there doesn’t seem to be significant issues discussed since:

@rfcbot fcp merge

@rfcbot
Copy link

rfcbot commented Oct 18, 2019 •
edited by alexcrichton

Team member @SimonSapin has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members:

No concerns currently listed.

Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!

See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me.

@rfcbot rfcbot added proposed-final-comment-period Proposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off. disposition-merge This issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it. labels Oct 18, 2019
@rfcbot
Copy link

rfcbot commented Oct 21, 2019

🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔

@rfcbot rfcbot added final-comment-period In the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised. and removed proposed-final-comment-period Proposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off. labels Oct 21, 2019
@rfcbot rfcbot added the finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue. label Oct 31, 2019
@rfcbot
Copy link

rfcbot commented Oct 31, 2019

The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete.

As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed.

The RFC will be merged soon.

@rfcbot rfcbot removed the final-comment-period In the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised. label Oct 31, 2019
@FlyingCanoe
Copy link

why is this not stable wet?

@matklad
Copy link
Member Author

matklad commented Dec 9, 2019

@FlyingCanoe it will be stable with Rust 1.40: https://github.com/XAMPPRocky/rust/blob/relnotes-1.40.0/RELEASES.md#stabilized-apis

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

The stabilization PR #61879 should have closed this issue. In fact it even landed before FCP in this thread was started…

@60ke 60ke mentioned this issue Dec 23, 2019
Closed
@shixiongjing shixiongjing mentioned this issue Jan 28, 2020
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
A-macros Area: All kinds of macros (custom derive, macro_rules!, proc macros, ..) B-unstable Blocker: Implemented in the nightly compiler and unstable. C-tracking-issue Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature. disposition-merge This issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it. finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue. T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
7 participants
@SimonSapin @Centril @matklad @jonas-schievink @withoutboats @rfcbot @FlyingCanoe