Skip to content

Tracking issue for adding a lifetime specifier to macro_rules! #34303

Description

@nikomatsakis

Activity

  1. sgrif commented on Jun 16, 2016

    @sgrif
    Contributor

    I'll open a new PR soon, I want to do one more thing on top of #33135

  2. added
    B-RFC-approvedBlocker: Approved by a merged RFC but not yet implemented.
    on Jun 17, 2016
  3. Phlosioneer commented on Jun 21, 2016

    @Phlosioneer
    Contributor

    Godspeed, @sgrif! This being in nightly would make my week.

  4. comex commented on Jan 3, 2017

    @comex
    Contributor

    @sgrif Any update?

  5. added
    B-unstableBlocker: Implemented in the nightly compiler and unstable.
    E-help-wantedCall for participation: Help is requested to fix this issue.
    on Mar 1, 2017
  6. brson commented on Mar 1, 2017

    @brson
    Contributor

    This doesn't seem particularly hard. Help wanted.

  7. durka commented on Mar 1, 2017

    @durka
    Contributor

    I wish we knew what the "one more thing" was besides just reopening the closed PR.

  8. mikeyhew commented on May 4, 2017

    @mikeyhew
    Contributor

    I'd like to help implement this. Where do I start?

  9. petrochenkov commented on May 4, 2017

    @petrochenkov
    Contributor

    @mikeyhew
    This is a good issue to start working on the compiler frontend.
    You may want to start with taking @sgrif's patch and rebasing it on the current master, and then making sure the tests pass.
    Then you'll have to add a feature gate for lifetime matcher and some docs (unstable book section) (see e0cd766, and 1d46805, and #41012 as a whole for examples of the same things being done with vis matcher.)

    @durka

    I wish we knew what the "one more thing" was besides just reopening the closed PR.

    This should be something truly marvelous, that this GitHub comment was too narrow to contain.

  10. added
    C-tracking-issueCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFC
    on Jul 22, 2017
  11. added a commit that references this issue on Jan 1, 2018
    1bcc6dc
  12. sgrif commented on Jan 1, 2018

    @sgrif
    Contributor

    This issue should remain open until the feature is stable, right?

  13. 11 remaining items

  14. nikomatsakis commented on Mar 16, 2018

    @nikomatsakis
    ContributorAuthor

    @durka right, that's precisely what I was thinking when I wrote the "on the other hand" part. I think I'm going to resolve my concern -- otherwise I guess we need a bunch more matchers.

    @rfcbot resolve underscore-lifetime

  15. durka commented on Mar 19, 2018

    @durka
    Contributor

    @nikomatsakis please say "resolved" for the bot

  16. nikomatsakis commented on Mar 20, 2018

    @nikomatsakis
    ContributorAuthor

    @rfcbot resolved underscore-lifetime

    Sigh.

  17. added
    final-comment-periodIn the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised.
    and removed
    proposed-final-comment-periodProposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off.
    on Mar 20, 2018
  18. rfcbot commented on Mar 20, 2018

    @rfcbot

    🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔

  19. rfcbot commented on Mar 30, 2018

    @rfcbot

    The final comment period is now complete.

  20. durka commented on Mar 30, 2018

    @durka
    Contributor

    🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀 🚀

  21. added a commit that references this issue on May 14, 2018
  22. added
    disposition-mergeThis issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it.
    and removed
    final-comment-periodIn the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised.
    on May 24, 2018
  23. dtolnay commented on Jun 10, 2018

    @dtolnay
    Member

    We don't have tests for a macro_rules falling through to the next rule after a $:lifetime matcher.

    And it doesn't work. 😢 I filed #51477 to follow up.

  24. Centril commented on Sep 15, 2018

    @Centril
    Contributor

    I think we can close this as it was stabilized; bugs and other things can be tracked as we usually do.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    B-RFC-approvedBlocker: Approved by a merged RFC but not yet implemented.B-unstableBlocker: Implemented in the nightly compiler and unstable.C-tracking-issueCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFCE-help-wantedCall for participation: Help is requested to fix this issue.T-langRelevant to the language teamdisposition-mergeThis issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it.finished-final-comment-periodThe final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue.

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions