https://github.com/rust-lang/rust http://git.dreamy.place/mirrors/rust/atom?h=1.83.0 2024-11-07T16:31:01+00:00 2024-11-07T16:31:01+00:00 Nicholas Nethercote n.nethercote@gmail.com 2024-11-04T04:41:32+00:00 urn:sha1:25ab47d5e6e4b90e90f402daaf2704d02d84a9e4 It caused a test regression in the `cfg_eval.rs` crate. (The bugfix in #129346 was in a different commit; this commit was just a code simplification.) (cherry picked from commit 981dc02eaf876a25b95581411e841ba664dc9e97) 2024-10-12T16:08:42+00:00 Trevor Gross t.gross35@gmail.com 2024-10-12T16:08:42+00:00 urn:sha1:63a91db022f8df0ed78bfca4633e6f626eae040d Add suggestion for removing invalid path sep `::` in fn def Add suggestion for removing invalid path separator `::` in function definition. for example: `fn invalid_path_separator::<T>() {}` fixes #130791 2024-10-11T13:11:13+00:00 bors bors@rust-lang.org 2024-10-11T13:11:13+00:00 urn:sha1:f4966590d8edd5f493a1aab04016b94a75494329 Retire the `unnamed_fields` feature for now `#![feature(unnamed_fields)]` was implemented in part in #115131 and #115367, however work on that feature has (afaict) stalled and in the mean time there have been some concerns raised (e.g.[^1][^2]) about whether `unnamed_fields` is worthwhile to have in the language, especially in its current desugaring. Because it represents a compiler implementation burden including a new kind of anonymous ADT and additional complication to field selection, and is quite prone to bugs today, I'm choosing to remove the feature. However, since I'm not one to really write a bunch of words, I'm specifically *not* going to de-RFC this feature. This PR essentially *rolls back* the state of this feature to "RFC accepted but not yet implemented"; however if anyone wants to formally unapprove the RFC from the t-lang side, then please be my guest. I'm just not totally willing to summarize the various language-facing reasons for why this feature is or is not worthwhile, since I'm coming from the compiler side mostly. Fixes #117942 Fixes #121161 Fixes #121263 Fixes #121299 Fixes #121722 Fixes #121799 Fixes #126969 Fixes #131041 Tracking: * https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49804 [^1]: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/Unnamed.20struct.2Funion.20fields [^2]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49804#issuecomment-1972619108 2024-10-06T14:28:30+00:00 codemountains 4kz12zz@gmail.com 2024-10-04T12:59:04+00:00 urn:sha1:6dfc4a0473ed0901b9c0d09f5189c41f3882d5fc 2024-10-04T13:42:53+00:00 Guillaume Gomez guillaume1.gomez@gmail.com 2024-10-04T13:42:53+00:00 urn:sha1:2ceeeb159dc5aa13cd090ade1b013c51461949a5 Implement RFC3695 Allow boolean literals as cfg predicates This PR implements https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695: allow boolean literals as cfg predicates, i.e. `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)`. r? `@nnethercote` *(or anyone with parser knowledge)* cc `@clubby789` 2024-10-03T04:26:58+00:00 Jubilee workingjubilee@gmail.com 2024-10-03T04:26:58+00:00 urn:sha1:b7c33e2f20e5a21231439835ffae167546153e54 Parser: better error messages for `@` in struct patterns 2024-10-01T17:55:46+00:00 Michael Goulet michael@errs.io 2024-09-30T02:17:30+00:00 urn:sha1:40465d2449f3d9a36c86b94885f58ed3ee2a99f0 2024-10-01T17:55:46+00:00 Michael Goulet michael@errs.io 2024-09-30T02:10:16+00:00 urn:sha1:e3a0da18633a8cfb5263bb975747352690b01fcf 2024-10-01T08:01:09+00:00 Urgau urgau@numericable.fr 2024-09-18T15:44:32+00:00 urn:sha1:57b9b1f9745a56943cc0aebc4c3ec487945f044e 2024-09-27T07:41:04+00:00 surechen chenshuo17@huawei.com 2024-09-26T04:35:44+00:00 urn:sha1:d0165956fe070d12090896aa5546e509045471eb for example: `fn invalid_path_separator::<T>() {}` fixes: #130791