-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
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
document constant expressions in rust.md reference manual #5551
Comments
For example, should constant expressions include the production |
Visiting for triage. Still important. |
Another question, should constant expressions include the production |
Nominating for removal from milestone. |
@brson you think we can release 1.0 without a formal definition for the constant expression sublanguage? |
Okay, we can live with shipping 1.0 without this, though it would be really good to have something nailed-down (and documented). Taking off the 1.0 milestone, but leaving as P-high to reflect its importance. |
We now do not refer to 'constant expressions' in the reference at all, and the section on statics seems fine to me. Giving this a close. |
@steveklabnik I'm not sure I agree with this assessment. I guess it depends on what level of precision we are shooting for. |
Okay, fill me in :) |
Triage: have had several conversations about this, never quite been sure exactly what we want to put and where. |
The reference is now in its own repo, so I have migrated this issue: rust-lang/reference#18 Side note: wow, a four digit issue ID. An endangered species at this point... |
…ge, r=phansch,flip1995 Fix match on vec items: match on vec[..] - Added new tests - Fixed false positive when matching on full range, which will never panic Closes rust-lang#5551 changelog: fix match_on_vec_items when matching full range
The section on "static items" (formerly entitled "constants") refers to some class of "constant expressions", but we have not defined what these are.
(I think catamorphism has noted this via comments in a few issues I have seen, but I have not seen an actual Issue for this topic; so I am promoting it to a full fledged issue.)
In particular, if we need a subgrammar, or some other sort of static analysis to classify the constant expressions correctly, then we should document it.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: