diff options
| author | bors <bors@rust-lang.org> | 2023-10-26 06:59:19 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bors <bors@rust-lang.org> | 2023-10-26 06:59:19 +0000 |
| commit | 104ac7bb6a17aee95fed2f70f2100e9236c11710 (patch) | |
| tree | dab8895df5a306f004a11ef811ab2db43ea91fae /compiler/rustc_macros/src | |
| parent | ccb160d3432dff025ab62696a82e576bf08aa006 (diff) | |
| parent | 1a9ea1f1a591915ef58931496d998871b8dd5524 (diff) | |
| download | rust-104ac7bb6a17aee95fed2f70f2100e9236c11710.tar.gz rust-104ac7bb6a17aee95fed2f70f2100e9236c11710.zip | |
Auto merge of #117148 - dtolnay:sinceversion, r=cjgillot
Store #[stable] attribute's `since` value in structured form Followup to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116773#pullrequestreview-1680913901. Prior to this PR, if you wrote an improper `since` version in a `stable` attribute, such as `#[stable(feature = "foo", since = "wat.0")]`, rustc would emit a diagnostic saying **_'since' must be a Rust version number, such as "1.31.0"_** and then throw out the whole `stable` attribute as if it weren't there. This strategy had 2 problems, both fixed in this PR: 1. If there was also a `#[deprecated]` attribute on the same item, rustc would want to enforce that the stabilization version is older than the deprecation version. This involved reparsing the `stable` attribute's `since` version, with a diagnostic **_invalid stability version found_** if it failed to parse. Of course this diagnostic was unreachable because an invalid `since` version would have already caused the `stable` attribute to be thrown out. This PR deletes that unreachable diagnostic. 2. By throwing out the `stable` attribute when `since` is invalid, you'd end up with a second diagnostic saying **_function has missing stability attribute_** even though your function is not missing a stability attribute. This PR preserves the `stable` attribute even when `since` cannot be parsed, avoiding the misleading second diagnostic. Followups I plan to try next: - Do the same for the `since` value of `#[deprecated]`. - See whether it makes sense to also preserve `stable` and/or `unstable` attributes when they contain an invalid `feature`. What redundant/misleading diagnostics can this eliminate? What problems arise from not having a usable feature name for some API, in the situation that we're already failing compilation, so not concerned about anything that happens in downstream code?
Diffstat (limited to 'compiler/rustc_macros/src')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions
