Stream: t-compiler/wg-rls-2.0

Topic: wg-rls-2.0/macro-by-example


matklad (Mar 16 2019 at 12:56, on Zulip):

One piece of infrastructure we need to unlock macro-expansion/name resolution experimentation is handling of macro by example. Specifically:

There's a super prototype implementation in rust-analyzer already, and I wonder how we should expand it further. For example, I can imagine we can fully libariify this, and share code with rustc (so, macro-by-example working subgroup can be formed). Or we can write something useful for proc-macro authors (perhaps sharing code with nrc's proc-macro-rules). Or we can decide that full support of mbe is out of scope, and just make a minimal impl that allows experimentation with hygiene and incremental name resolution.

I don't really have any opinion here :) Perhaps someone from @WG-rls2.0 has more experience in this area?

matklad (Mar 16 2019 at 12:57, on Zulip):

This commit sums up the current state of mbe in rust-analyzer pretty well https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/968/commits/fb6576b6b7f500c37123fd10b1c8f90d6d90219a :)

Florian Diebold (Mar 16 2019 at 15:32, on Zulip):

We went looking everywhere, but couldn’t find those commits.

I hope that's not the actual state of mbe in rust-analyzer ;)

Jake Goulding (Mar 16 2019 at 15:37, on Zulip):

Usually indicates that the branch was force-pushed and indeed that specific commit hash is gone.

Jake Goulding (Mar 16 2019 at 15:38, on Zulip):

Editing the URL to remove the SHA and go back to the PR proper is usually a good step

matklad (Mar 16 2019 at 15:46, on Zulip):

Yeah, the situation is a tiny bit better: https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/968/commits/1bcc01822dbfc4f917105b5e22032ad8a728b33b :D (link to commit, b/c PR is huge)

Last update: Nov 12 2019 at 15:30UTC