So, I've recently been thinking of starting up a WG for macros. I haver a few specific features and projects in mind, some of which are already underway. Would there be any interest in this? What's the process?
CC @Edward Pierzchalski
Sorry for the late reply - I'm interested in such a WG existing as well as being part of it.
However, as far as I'm aware, there's not as much of a push for macro area work relative to the other WG areas. A lot of the heavy-hitters are busy or unavailable, as well. Is that going to be an issue?
(also, bikeshed/nitpick: are macros a compiler WG area or a language WG area?)
I consider macros a compiler WG area except for proposals for syntax or domain expansion, which would be language WG before the compiler WG gets the task to implement those changes.
Since nrc and jseyfried left, there are no very experienced people in the area, except petrochenkov I think.
I have more experience than most, so I could help lead it.
@David Tolnay would be a good person to get involved, but I know he's busy.
@Edward Pierzchalski ^
I'm generally busy and can do occasional and smaller tasks, but not ready to take responsibility for larger or prolonged work.
On the topic of larger work: @Alexander Regueiro what do you have in mind for this WG? Is there a macros roadmap floating around somewhere?
no roadmap yet.
obviously eager expansion would be part of it
the new hygiene-manipulating macros
those 3 were the main things I had in mind
also smaller issues
none of those seem like compiler areas
I think that a better idea for a working group would be to focus on trying to create the "name resolution" crate we've oft talked about, that would sort of document and clarify our existing name resoution algorithm