-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
Pre-expansion gate some more things #64672
Conversation
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Implementation looks good, but this needs a crater run, and then perhaps some soft feature-gating depending on its result. @bors try |
⌛ Trying commit 18a29c6c798488a64a81dac289c67636338742f3 with merge 00e4530a79c42b21a6ca2ac1edb597c90d21f89f... |
☀️ Try build successful - checks-azure |
@craterbot run mode=check-only |
👌 Experiment ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more |
🚧 Experiment ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more |
🎉 Experiment
|
Marking as waiting on author to triage the regressions. |
crates.ioerror[E0658]:
|
Notes:
My suggestion is that we soft-gate (tho I'm not sure how to do it...) / wait with:
Everything else can be pre-expansion gated immediately (I will cherry-pick out a separate PR that does this.) and then we can consider the rest. |
I agree with the conclusions, waiting on the PR hard-gating everything except auto traits, negative impls and extern types. |
18a29c6
to
d2ebb04
Compare
Filed #65742 for the subset; marking this as blocked on that. |
…r=davidtwco Pre-expansion gate most of the things This is a subset of rust-lang#64672. A crater run has already been done and this PR implements conclusions according to rust-lang#64672 (comment). r? @davidtwco cc @petrochenkov
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
d2ebb04
to
4bf94c4
Compare
4bf94c4
to
e0cea6c
Compare
@petrochenkov Any ideas re. how we can soft-gate pre-expansion without losing hard-gate post-expansion? It seems to me we would somehow need to check & store if the spans arose from expansion during parsing to partition the two. |
The job Click to expand the log.
I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #65907) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Move feature gating of various unstable syntactic features to the parser.
r? @petrochenkov