@WG-prioritization/alerts issue #76399 has been requested for prioritization.
This looks like to be a fresh regression that immediately impacted some actual code. I'd say
P-high (or above?) to bring it to attention to the next meeting. Makes sense?
I don't know which behavior above is correct but I would like it to be intentionally decided so that we know what behavior to implement in proc-macro2.
I think this indeed deserves
This breaks some real-world code such as the following, though only with old versions of some libraries as far as I have found.
Even if it breaks only old versions of libraries I think we can afford a
P-critical given that this behaviour was probably not intended in #76285
marking this as p-critical
Issue #76399's prioritization request has been removed.
I-nominated make sense? @apiraino @DPC
I agree. The issue reporter asks for an opinion that requires a bit more context
Critical issues do get discussed at the compiler meeting
ah ok so in this case it would be redundant?
I-nominated makes more sense on lower priority issues that we want anyway to be discussed, correct?
I-nominated at the same time are somewhat redundant yeah
still valid I think :)