Implement stability attribute overhaul #20445
Assignees
Labels
B-RFC-approved
Blocker: Approved by a merged RFC but not yet implemented.
Milestone
Comments
alexcrichton
added
I-nominated
B-RFC-approved
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 27, 2015
This implements the remaining bits of 'feature staging', as described in [RFC 507](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0507-release-channels.md). This is not quite done, but the substance of the work is complete so submitting for early review. Key changes: * `unstable`, `stable` and `deprecated` attributes all require 'feature' and 'since', and support an optional 'reason'. * The `unstable` lint is removed. * A new 'stability checking' pass warns when a used unstable library feature has not been activated with the `feature` attribute. At 1.0 beta this will become an error. * A new 'unused feature checking' pass emits a lint ('unused_feature', renamed from 'unknown_feature') for any features that were activated but not used. * A new tidy script `featureck.py` performs some global sanity checking, particularly that 'since' numbers agree, and also prints out a summary of features. Differences from RFC: * As implemented `unstable` requires a `since` attribute. I do not know if this is useful. I included it in the original sed script and just left it. * RFC didn't specify the name of the optional 'reason' attribute. * This continues to use 'unstable', 'stable' and 'deprecated' names (the 'nice' names) instead of 'staged_unstable', but only activates them with the crate-level 'staged_api' attribute. I intend to update the RFC based on the outcome of this PR. Issues: * The unused feature check doesn't account for language features - i.e. you can activate a language feature, not use it, and not get the error. Open questions: * All unstable and deprecated features are named 'unnamed_feature', which i picked just because it is uniquely greppable. This is the 'catch-all' feature. What should it be? * All stable features are named 'grandfathered'. What should this be? TODO: * Add check that all `deprecated` attributes are paired with a `stable` attribute in order to preserve the knowledge about when a feature became stable. * Update rustdoc in various ways. * Remove obsolete stability discussion from reference. * Add features for 'path', 'io', 'os', 'hash' and 'rand'. cc #20445 @alexcrichton @aturon
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 28, 2015
This implements the remaining bits of 'feature staging', as described in [RFC 507](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0507-release-channels.md). This is not quite done, but the substance of the work is complete so submitting for early review. Key changes: * `unstable`, `stable` and `deprecated` attributes all require 'feature' and 'since', and support an optional 'reason'. * The `unstable` lint is removed. * A new 'stability checking' pass warns when a used unstable library feature has not been activated with the `feature` attribute. At 1.0 beta this will become an error. * A new 'unused feature checking' pass emits a lint ('unused_feature', renamed from 'unknown_feature') for any features that were activated but not used. * A new tidy script `featureck.py` performs some global sanity checking, particularly that 'since' numbers agree, and also prints out a summary of features. Differences from RFC: * As implemented `unstable` requires a `since` attribute. I do not know if this is useful. I included it in the original sed script and just left it. * RFC didn't specify the name of the optional 'reason' attribute. * This continues to use 'unstable', 'stable' and 'deprecated' names (the 'nice' names) instead of 'staged_unstable', but only activates them with the crate-level 'staged_api' attribute. I intend to update the RFC based on the outcome of this PR. Issues: * The unused feature check doesn't account for language features - i.e. you can activate a language feature, not use it, and not get the error. Open questions: * All unstable and deprecated features are named 'unnamed_feature', which i picked just because it is uniquely greppable. This is the 'catch-all' feature. What should it be? * All stable features are named 'grandfathered'. What should this be? TODO: * Add check that all `deprecated` attributes are paired with a `stable` attribute in order to preserve the knowledge about when a feature became stable. * Update rustdoc in various ways. * Remove obsolete stability discussion from reference. * Add features for 'path', 'io', 'os', 'hash' and 'rand'. cc #20445 @alexcrichton @aturon
|
Completed in #21248 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
and others
Tracking issue for rust-lang/rfcs#507
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: