Skip to content

Conversation

nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor

This can be considered a downpayment on rust-lang/rfcs#572.

r? @brson
cc @pnkfelix

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor Author

cc @Manishearth

@Manishearth
Copy link
Member

Shouldn't rustc_move_fragments be behind its own gate? That seems like a "feature" to me.

@brson
Copy link
Contributor

brson commented Feb 16, 2015

Awesome. This will make me much happier about random rustc_ attributes if they are forever gated.

@brson
Copy link
Contributor

brson commented Feb 16, 2015

@bors: r+ 7ca06ea

If some of the existing attributes are misclassified then that can be addressed in a followup.

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Manishearth I don't consider attributes like rustc_move_fragments, rustc_variance, or rustc_error to be features. We never intend for stable code to use them, they're just hacks to allow for better unit-testing (but very convenient, useful hacks!). The idea was that rustc_attrs is for attributes we never intend to stabilize -- anything that might eventually be user-exposed should get its own feature-gate, I agree.

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors r- subsumed by #22364

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.

3 participants