- The attribute is behind a feature gate.
- Error if both #[naked] and #[track_caller] are applied to the same function.
- Error if #[track_caller] is applied to a non-function item.
- Error if ABI is not "rust"
- Error if #[track_caller] is applied to a trait function.
Error codes and descriptions are pending.
Add support for `const unsafe? extern fn`
This works just as you might expect - an `const extern fn` is a `const fn` that is callable from foreign code.
Currently, panicking is not allowed in `const`s. When https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2345 (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/51999) is stabilized, then panicking in an `const extern fn` will produce a compile-time error when invoked at compile time, and an abort when invoked at runtime.
Since this is extending the language (we're allowing the `const` keyword in a new context), I believe that this will need an FCP. However, it's a very minor change, so I didn't think that filing an RFC was necessary.
This will allow libc (and other FFI crates) to make many functions `const`, without having to give up on making them `extern` as well.
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/64926.
This works just as you might expect - an 'extern const fn' is a 'const
fn' that is callable from foreign code.
Currently, panicking is not allowed in consts. When RFC 2345 is
stabilized, then panicking in an 'extern const fn' will produce a
compile-time error when invoked at compile time, and an abort when
invoked at runtime.
Since this is extending the language (we're allowing the `const` keyword
in a new context), I believe that this will need an FCP. However, it's a
very minor change, so I didn't think that filing an RFC was necessary.
This will allow libc (and other FFI crates) to make many functions
`const`, without having to give up on making them `extern` as well.
Stabilize `param_attrs` in Rust 1.39.0
# Stabilization proposal
I propose that we stabilize `#![feature(param_attrs)]`.
Tracking issue: #60406
Version: 1.39 (2019-09-26 => beta, 2019-11-07 => stable).
## What is stabilized
It is now possible to add outer attributes like `#[cfg(..)]` on formal parameters of functions, closures, and function pointer types. For example:
```rust
fn len(
#[cfg(windows)] slice: &[u16],
#[cfg(not(windows))] slice: &[u8],
) -> usize {
slice.len()
}
```
## What isn't stabilized
* Documentation comments like `/// Doc` on parameters.
* Code expansion of a user-defined `#[proc_macro_attribute]` macro used on parameters.
* Built-in attributes other than `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, `allow`, `warn`, `deny`, and `forbid`. Currently, only the lints `unused_variables` and `unused_mut` have effect and may be controlled on parameters.
## Motivation
The chief motivations for stabilizing `param_attrs` include:
* Finer conditional compilation with `#[cfg(..)]` and linting control of variables.
* Richer macro DSLs created by users.
* External tools and compiler internals can take advantage of the additional information that the parameters provide.
For more examples, see the [RFC][rfc motivation].
## Reference guide
In the grammar of function and function pointer, the grammar of variadic tails (`...`) and parameters are changed respectively from:
```rust
FnParam = { pat:Pat ":" }? ty:Type;
VaradicTail = "...";
```
into:
```rust
FnParam = OuterAttr* { pat:Pat ":" }? ty:Type;
VaradicTail = OuterAttr* "...";
```
The grammar of a closure parameter is changed from:
```rust
ClosureParam = pat:Pat { ":" ty:Type }?;
```
into:
```rust
ClosureParam = OuterAttr* pat:Pat { ":" ty:Type }?;
```
More generally, where there's a list of formal (value) parameters separated or terminated by `,` and delimited by `(` and `)`. Each parameter in that list may optionally be prefixed by `OuterAttr+`.
Note that in all cases, `OuterAttr*` applies to the whole parameter and not just the pattern. This distinction matters in pretty printing and in turn for macros.
## History
* On 2018-10-15, @Robbepop proposes [RFC 2565][rfc], "Attributes in formal function parameter position".
* On 2019-04-30, [RFC 2565][rfc] is merged and the tracking issue is made.
* On 2019-06-12, a partial implementation was completed. The implementation was done in [#60669][60669] by @c410-f3r and the PR was reviewed by @petrochenkov and @Centril.
* On 2019-07-29, [#61238][61238] was fixed in [#61856][61856]. The issue fixed was that lint attributes on function args had no effect. The PR was written by @c410-f3r and reviewed by @matthewjasper, @petrochenkov, and @oli-obk.
* On 2019-08-02, a bug [#63210][63210] was filed wherein the attributes on formal parameters would not be passed to macros. The issue was about forgetting to call the relevant method in `fn print_arg` in the pretty printer. In [#63212][63212], written by @Centril on 2019-08-02 and reviewed by @davidtwco, the issue aforementioned was fixed.
* This PR stabilizes `param_attrs`.
## Tests
* [On Rust 2018, attributes aren't permitted on function parameters without a pattern in trait definitions.](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/rfc-2565-param-attrs/param-attrs-2018.rs)
* [All attributes that should be allowed. This includes `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, and lints check attributes.](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/rfc-2565-param-attrs/param-attrs-allowed.rs)
* [Built-in attributes, which should be forbidden, e.g., `#[test]`, are.](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/rfc-2565-param-attrs/param-attrs-builtin-attrs.rs)
* [`cfg` and `cfg_attr` are properly evaluated.](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/rfc-2565-param-attrs/param-attrs-cfg.rs)
* [`unused_mut`](46f405ec4d/src/test/ui/rfc-2565-param-attrs/param-attrs-cfg.rs) and [`unused_variables`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/lint/lint-unused-variables.rs) are correctly applied to parameter patterns.
* [Pretty printing takes formal parameter attributes into account.](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/rfc-2565-param-attrs/param-attrs-pretty.rs)
## Possible future work
* Custom attributes inside function parameters aren't currently supported but it is something being worked on internally.
* Since documentation comments are syntactic sugar for `#[doc(...)]`, it is possible to allow literal `/// Foo` comments on function parameters.
[rfc motivation]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2565-formal-function-parameter-attributes.md#motivation
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2565
[60669]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/60669
[61856]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/61856
[63210]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/63210
[61238]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61238
[63212]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/63212
This report is a collaborative work with @Centril.
This allows lints and other diagnostics to refer to items
by a unique ID instead of relying on whacky path
resolution schemes that may break when items are
relocated.
This replaces the ad-hoc tuples used in the different feature gate files
and unifies their content into a common type, leading to more readable
matches and other good stuff that comes from having named fields. It
also contains the description of each feature as extracted from the doc
comment.
