Skip to content

Implement RFC 873: Type Macros#27296

Merged
bors merged 11 commits into
rust-lang:masterfrom
jroesch:type-macros
Aug 6, 2015
Merged

Implement RFC 873: Type Macros#27296
bors merged 11 commits into
rust-lang:masterfrom
jroesch:type-macros

Conversation

@jroesch

@jroesch jroesch commented Jul 26, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This pull request implements the functionality for RFC 873. This is currently just an update of @freebroccolo's branch from January, the corresponding commits are linked in each commit message.

@nikomatsakis and I had talked about updating the macro language to support a lifetime fragment specifier, and it is possible to do that work on this branch as well. If so we can (collectively) talk about it next week during the pre-RustCamp work week.

@rust-highfive

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

r? @huonw

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

@nikomatsakis

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Can you ad a feature gate (standard procedure)?

@jroesch

jroesch commented Jul 26, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@nikomatsakis yeah, I wasn't clear about how we were doing RFCs. Feature gate for one release cycle?

Comment thread src/libsyntax/feature_gate.rs Outdated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

r-

@huonw

huonw commented Jul 30, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Could you add a compile-fail test for the feature gate? And maybe some more basic run-pass tests for the macros themselves?

@bors

bors commented Jul 31, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #27382) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@jroesch jroesch force-pushed the type-macros branch 3 times, most recently from d6f9311 to 2d80d63 Compare August 1, 2015 23:53
Comment thread src/libsyntax/ext/expand.rs Outdated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think (see issue #27336) is a slightly better phrasing of this.

@huonw

huonw commented Aug 3, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

r=me with an ERROR in the compile-fail test (and some nits).

@jroesch

jroesch commented Aug 4, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I addressed all your comments and it should be good to go. @bors r=huonw

@bors

bors commented Aug 4, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

📌 Commit 471370a has been approved by huonw

@bors

bors commented Aug 5, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

⌛ Testing commit 471370a with merge fbf5fcf...

@bors

bors commented Aug 5, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

💔 Test failed - auto-mac-64-nopt-t

@jroesch

jroesch commented Aug 5, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@bors retry

@jroesch

jroesch commented Aug 6, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@bors r=huonw

@bors

bors commented Aug 6, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

📌 Commit 83e43bb has been approved by huonw

@bors

bors commented Aug 6, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

⌛ Testing commit 83e43bb with merge 11deb08...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 6, 2015
This pull request implements the functionality for [RFC 873](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0873-type-macros.md). This is currently just an update of @freebroccolo's branch from January, the corresponding commits are linked in each commit message.

@nikomatsakis and I had talked about updating the macro language to support a lifetime fragment specifier, and it is possible to do that work on this branch as well. If so we can (collectively) talk about it next week during the pre-RustCamp work week.
@bors bors merged commit 83e43bb into rust-lang:master Aug 6, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants