check stability of macro invocations
I haven't implemented tests yet but this should be a pretty solid prototype. I think as-implemented it will also stability-check macro invocations in the same crate, dunno if we want that or not.
I don't know if we want this to go through `rustc::middle::stability` or not, considering the information there wouldn't be available at the time of macro expansion (even for external crates, right?).
r? @nrc
closes#34079
cc @petrochenkov @durka @jseyfried #38356
Run rustfmt and add doc comments to libsyntax/ext/tt/macro_parser.rs
Similar to #47603
cc @theotherphil since you reviewed my other PR 😄
And because they are already assigned on #47603:
r? @arielb1
Run rustfmt and add doc comments to libsyntax/ext/tt/quoted.rs
I was already going to try to understand this code to try to implement rust-lang/rfcs#2298. I figured I would put that knowledge into comments and share... This PR contains _no changes_ to the code itself -- just formatting and comments.
I'm not sure what the best way to do this is. I plan to make more such PR for other files, but I figured it would have fewer conflicts if I do it file by file...
Started rebasing @sgrif's PR #33135 off of current master. (Well, actually merging it into a new branch based off current master.)
The following files still need to be fixed or at least reviewed:
- `src/libsyntax/ext/tt/macro_parser.rs`: calls `Parser::parse_lifetime`, which doesn't exist anymore
- `src/libsyntax/parse/parser.rs`: @sgrif added an error message to `Parser::parse_lifetime`. Code has since been refactored, so I just took it out for now.
- `src/libsyntax/ext/tt/transcribe.rs`: This code has been refactored bigtime. Not sure whether @sgrif's changes here are still necessary. Took it out for this commit.
syntax: Relax path grammar
TLDR: Accept the disambiguator `::` in "type" paths (`Type::<Args>`), accept the disambiguator `::` before parenthesized generic arguments (`Fn::(Args)`).
The "turbofish" disambiguator `::<>` in expression paths is a necessary evil required for path parsing to be both simple and to give reasonable results.
Since paths in expressions usually refer to values (but not necessarily, e.g. `Struct::<u8> { field: 0 }` is disambiguated, but refers to a type), people often consider `::<>` to be inherent to *values*, and not *expressions* and want to write disambiguated paths for values even in contexts where disambiguation is not strictly necessary, for example when a path is passed to a macro `m!(Vec::<i32>::new)`.
The problem is that currently, if the disambiguator is not *required*, then it's *prohibited*. This results in confusion - see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41740, https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/macro-path-uses-novel-syntax/5561.
This PR makes the disambiguator *optional* instead of prohibited in contexts where it's not strictly required, so people can pass paths to macros in whatever form they consider natural (e.g. disambiguated form for value paths).
This PR also accepts the disambiguator in paths with parenthesized arguments (`Fn::(Args)`) for consistency and to simplify testing of stuff like https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/41856#issuecomment-301219194.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41740
cc @rust-lang/lang
r? @nikomatsakis
