Suggest quoting unquoted idents in attrs

[sjwang05]

Closes #58462

[rustbot]

r? @WaffleLapkin

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[sjwang05]

@rustbot review

[WaffleLapkin]

Please add a comment about what this check does, exactly, and why we only accept identifiers in the else (I'm also pretty sure identifiers are unrelated to expansions?...)

[sjwang05]

Added a comment explaining the check, including the from_expansion().

why we only accept identifiers in the else

From briefly glancing over attributes-related tests, it seemed like the "or identifier" would be valid for the remaining cases covered by the else branch, e.g.

rust/tests/ui/attributes/nonterminal-expansion.rs

Line 6 in 1a47f5b

//~^ ERROR expected unsuffixed literal or identifier, found `n!()`

@rustbot review

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #119578) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[WaffleLapkin]

This looks good to me! 🙂

Please rebase this PR to resolve conflicts.

Marking as S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. , once you've fixed the conflicts, please use @rustbot review (learn more about rustbot commands). @rustbot author.

[sjwang05]

Rebased, thanks for the help.

@rustbot review

[WaffleLapkin]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit aa8ecd0 has been approved by WaffleLapkin

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit aa8ecd0 with merge aa5f781...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: WaffleLapkin
Pushing aa5f781 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (aa5f781): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.3%	[0.3%, 0.3%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.3%	[0.3%, 0.3%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.0%	[1.0%, 1.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-4.5%	[-4.5%, -4.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.2%	[-2.2%, -2.2%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-4.5%	[-4.5%, -4.5%]	1

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	2.9%	[2.9%, 2.9%]	1

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 664.704s -> 666.086s (0.21%)
Artifact size: 308.20 MiB -> 308.21 MiB (0.00%)