feat: Support cfg(true) and cfg(false)
#18420
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
ChayimFriedman2
force-pushed
the
cfg-true-false
branch
from
24ff9f8 to
d803986
Compare
As per RFC 3695.
ChayimFriedman2
force-pushed
the
cfg-true-false
branch
from
d803986 to
074050c
Compare
Veykril
approved these changes
Oct 28, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a bit odd imo, and also does not work super well with the IDE layer integration and the CrateData::potential_cfg_options field, which should technically list both true and false literals I think, for completions sake at least. Though I guess that can be special cased for completions at least.
Will merge it either way for now as its not a big change.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
As per RFC 3695.
Closes #18397.
I chose to just insert
trueinto the atom list (and prevent touchingtrueandfalse, for extra safety) as this seems simpler and saves a check when checking cfg (which is more common than updating it). Memory usage impact also should be negligible (one cfg atom per crate).