Fix pretty-printing of $crate (take 4)#62393
Merged
bors merged 4 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom Jul 10, 2019
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
r? @pnkfelix (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Contributor
Author
Member
|
I think another test here that checks for us doing the right thing with an external crate, i.e., With or without that, r=me |
...but only if those tokens are printed from inside of AST pretty-printing.
Stop visiting AST to discover those contexts, just iterate through hygiene data instead
Contributor
Author
|
@bors r=Mark-Simulacrum |
Collaborator
|
📌 Commit 4cb67c0 has been approved by |
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 10, 2019
…ulacrum Fix pretty-printing of `$crate` (take 4) Pretty-print `$crate` as `crate` or `crate_name` in unstructured tokens like `a $crate c` in `foo!(a $crate c)`, but only if those tokens are printed as a part of AST pretty-printing, rather than as a standalone token stream. Fixes rust-lang#62325 Previous iterations - rust-lang#56647, rust-lang#57155, rust-lang#57915.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 10, 2019
Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - #61853 (Emit warning when trying to use PGO in conjunction with unwinding on …) - #62278 (Add Iterator::partition_in_place() and is_partitioned()) - #62283 (Target::arch can take more than listed options) - #62393 (Fix pretty-printing of `$crate` (take 4)) - #62474 (Prepare for LLVM 9 update) Failed merges: r? @ghost
Collaborator
Contributor
|
I've got error with |
Contributor
Author
|
@o01eg |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 11, 2019
pretty-print: Do not lose the `$crate` printing flag in `print_tt` #62393 had this accidental mistake. Fixes #62562 r? @Mark-Simulacrum
This was referenced Aug 25, 2019
Manishearth
added a commit
to Manishearth/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 1, 2020
expand: Stop using nonterminals for passing tokens to attribute and derive macros Make one more step towards fully token-based expansion and fix issues described in rust-lang#72545 (comment). Now `struct S;` is passed to `foo!(struct S;)` and `#[foo] struct S;` in the same way - as a token stream `struct S ;`, rather than a single non-terminal token `NtItem` which is then broken into parts later. The cost is making pretty-printing of token streams less pretty. Some of the pretty-printing regressions will be recovered by keeping jointness with each token, which we will need to do anyway. Unfortunately, this is not exactly the same thing as rust-lang#73102. One more observable effect is how `$crate` is printed in the attribute input. Inside `NtItem` was printed as `crate` or `that_crate`, now as a part of a token stream it's printed as `$crate` (there are good reasons for these differences, see rust-lang#62393 and related PRs). This may break old proc macros (custom derives) written before the main portion of the proc macro API (macros 1.2) was stabilized, those macros did `input.to_string()` and reparsed the result, now that result can contain `$crate` which cannot be reparsed. So, I think we should do this regardless, but we need to run crater first. r? @Aaron1011
Manishearth
added a commit
to Manishearth/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 2, 2020
expand: Stop using nonterminals for passing tokens to attribute and derive macros Make one more step towards fully token-based expansion and fix issues described in rust-lang#72545 (comment). Now `struct S;` is passed to `foo!(struct S;)` and `#[foo] struct S;` in the same way - as a token stream `struct S ;`, rather than a single non-terminal token `NtItem` which is then broken into parts later. The cost is making pretty-printing of token streams less pretty. Some of the pretty-printing regressions will be recovered by keeping jointness with each token, which we will need to do anyway. Unfortunately, this is not exactly the same thing as rust-lang#73102. One more observable effect is how `$crate` is printed in the attribute input. Inside `NtItem` was printed as `crate` or `that_crate`, now as a part of a token stream it's printed as `$crate` (there are good reasons for these differences, see rust-lang#62393 and related PRs). This may break old proc macros (custom derives) written before the main portion of the proc macro API (macros 1.2) was stabilized, those macros did `input.to_string()` and reparsed the result, now that result can contain `$crate` which cannot be reparsed. So, I think we should do this regardless, but we need to run crater first. r? @Aaron1011
Manishearth
added a commit
to Manishearth/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 2, 2020
expand: Stop using nonterminals for passing tokens to attribute and derive macros Make one more step towards fully token-based expansion and fix issues described in rust-lang#72545 (comment). Now `struct S;` is passed to `foo!(struct S;)` and `#[foo] struct S;` in the same way - as a token stream `struct S ;`, rather than a single non-terminal token `NtItem` which is then broken into parts later. The cost is making pretty-printing of token streams less pretty. Some of the pretty-printing regressions will be recovered by keeping jointness with each token, which we will need to do anyway. Unfortunately, this is not exactly the same thing as rust-lang#73102. One more observable effect is how `$crate` is printed in the attribute input. Inside `NtItem` was printed as `crate` or `that_crate`, now as a part of a token stream it's printed as `$crate` (there are good reasons for these differences, see rust-lang#62393 and related PRs). This may break old proc macros (custom derives) written before the main portion of the proc macro API (macros 1.2) was stabilized, those macros did `input.to_string()` and reparsed the result, now that result can contain `$crate` which cannot be reparsed. So, I think we should do this regardless, but we need to run crater first. r? @Aaron1011
Manishearth
added a commit
to Manishearth/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 2, 2020
expand: Stop using nonterminals for passing tokens to attribute and derive macros Make one more step towards fully token-based expansion and fix issues described in rust-lang#72545 (comment). Now `struct S;` is passed to `foo!(struct S;)` and `#[foo] struct S;` in the same way - as a token stream `struct S ;`, rather than a single non-terminal token `NtItem` which is then broken into parts later. The cost is making pretty-printing of token streams less pretty. Some of the pretty-printing regressions will be recovered by keeping jointness with each token, which we will need to do anyway. Unfortunately, this is not exactly the same thing as rust-lang#73102. One more observable effect is how `$crate` is printed in the attribute input. Inside `NtItem` was printed as `crate` or `that_crate`, now as a part of a token stream it's printed as `$crate` (there are good reasons for these differences, see rust-lang#62393 and related PRs). This may break old proc macros (custom derives) written before the main portion of the proc macro API (macros 1.2) was stabilized, those macros did `input.to_string()` and reparsed the result, now that result can contain `$crate` which cannot be reparsed. So, I think we should do this regardless, but we need to run crater first. r? @Aaron1011
Manishearth
added a commit
to Manishearth/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 2, 2020
expand: Stop using nonterminals for passing tokens to attribute and derive macros Make one more step towards fully token-based expansion and fix issues described in rust-lang#72545 (comment). Now `struct S;` is passed to `foo!(struct S;)` and `#[foo] struct S;` in the same way - as a token stream `struct S ;`, rather than a single non-terminal token `NtItem` which is then broken into parts later. The cost is making pretty-printing of token streams less pretty. Some of the pretty-printing regressions will be recovered by keeping jointness with each token, which we will need to do anyway. Unfortunately, this is not exactly the same thing as rust-lang#73102. One more observable effect is how `$crate` is printed in the attribute input. Inside `NtItem` was printed as `crate` or `that_crate`, now as a part of a token stream it's printed as `$crate` (there are good reasons for these differences, see rust-lang#62393 and related PRs). This may break old proc macros (custom derives) written before the main portion of the proc macro API (macros 1.2) was stabilized, those macros did `input.to_string()` and reparsed the result, now that result can contain `$crate` which cannot be reparsed. So, I think we should do this regardless, but we need to run crater first. r? @Aaron1011
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Pretty-print
$crateascrateorcrate_namein unstructured tokens likea $crate cinfoo!(a $crate c), but only if those tokens are printed as a part of AST pretty-printing, rather than as a standalone token stream.Fixes #62325
Previous iterations - #56647, #57155, #57915.