Repository navigation
Conversation
…lude As discussed at the tracking issue, there has been support for having these in the prelude, but adding to the current prelude wasn't possible because of conflicts with glob-imported macros. It is possible to add to the future edition's prelude, so do that here.
|
r? @JohnTitor rustbot has assigned @JohnTitor. Use Why was this reviewer chosen?The reviewer was selected based on:
|
|
@rustbot label +I-libs-nominated Nominating for @rust-lang/libs since I don't think this needs FCP right now (the module is unstable) but we should have some consensus on future prelude items so we don't need to re-litigate much when the edition is ready to ship. Should be a pretty easy decision. |
|
I think it would make sense to productively FCP prelude changes and add them to the edition guide just so we have less work to do before the edition rolls around. |
|
That was my initial thought, but I wasn't sure how to encode the result since it doesn't really make sense to set a @rfcbot fcp merge libs |
|
@tgross35 has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members: No concerns currently listed. Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! cc @rust-lang/libs-ping: FCP proposed for libs, please feel free to register concerns. |
assert_matches and debug_assert_matches to the next peludeassert_matches and debug_assert_matches to the next prelude
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
|
So I guess to reclarify my thoughts:
|
|
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
|
FWIW: this should just be marked as stable in the module since I guess, even though it's a stability leak, we should be fine to just add it anyway since that leak already exists for all the other things in the module. |
|
I've wanted to reach for this more than once but ended up reaching for assert!(matches!()) instead in part due to laziness to import, so I wanted to express my support. |
|
The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete. As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed. |
As discussed at the tracking issue, there has been support for having these in the prelude, but adding to the current prelude wasn't possible because of conflicts with glob-imported macros. It is possible to add to the future edition's prelude, so do that here.