Implement RFC3695: Allow boolean literals as cfg predicates #14649
Conversation
|
r? @weihanglo rustbot has assigned @weihanglo. Use |
rustbot
added
A-cfg-expr
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #14137) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Urgau
force-pushed
the
cfg-true-false
branch
2 times, most recently
from
6bc170b to
756003f
Compare
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #14752) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #14497) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably ed31dad) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Urgau
force-pushed
the
cfg-true-false
branch
from
a7294ad to
e358842
Compare
…ts (#14671) ### What does this PR try to resolve? This PR tries to address this thread #14649 (comment) in #14649 regarding `cfg(true)`/`cfg(false)` (and keywords more generally) which are wrongly accepted[^1] as ident. To address this, this PR does two things: 1. it introduce a future-incompatibility warning against those (wrongly) accepted keywords as ident 2. it add parsing for raw-idents (`r#true`) add suggest-it in the warning ### How should we test and review this PR? This PR should be reviewed commit-by-commit. Tests are included in preliminary commits. ### Additional information I added a new struct for representing `Ident`s which is rawness aware. Which implied updating `cargo-platform` to `0.2.0` due to the API changes. r? @epage [^1]: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=ccfb9c894dbf14e791c8ae7e4798efd0
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably 10c255a) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
|
The future incompatibility warning was merged in #14671. I tried adding an unstable Cargo feature but that would I mean either making not insignificant refactor to the parsing or evaluation, or adding a hack to transform back, neither felt justified enough for such a temporary mechanism. Therefore this PR is blocked on enough time having passed to being able to unconditional apply to new logic. @rustbot label -S-waiting-on-review +S-blocked-external |
rustbot
added
S-blocked-external
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-author
Urgau
force-pushed
the
cfg-true-false
branch
from
e358842 to
b33f175
Compare
|
Not that I'm aware.
I'm planning on issuing after the holidays a call-for-testing and then directly propose a T-lang stabilization. This could mean only 1 or 2 releases with the future compact warning, not sure if you (T-cargo) would be comfortable with that. We could also wait and stabilize both at the same time, but I don't think that's required. |
What does this PR try to resolve?
This PR implements rust-lang/rfcs#3695: allow boolean literals as cfg predicates, i.e.
cfg(true)andcfg(false).How should we test and review this PR?
The PR should be reviewed commit by commit and tested by looking at the tests and using
[target.'cfg(<true/false>)']inCargo.toml/.cargo/config.toml.Additional information
I had to bump
cargo-platformto0.3.0has we are changingCfgExprenum in a semver incompatible change.I choose a use aCargo.tomlfeature (for the manifest) as well as a unstable CLI flag for the.cargo/config.tomlpart.Given the very small (two occurrences on Github Search) forcfg(true)andcfg(false), I choose to gate the feature under a error and not a warning.