Document the 2021 edition changes to macros-by-example pat metavariables
#1135
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
Yea, I think that would be good to add. Thanks! |
…finition's edition
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 19, 2022
Update books ## nomicon 1 commits in c05c452b36358821bf4122f9c418674edd1d713d..66d097d3d80e8f88c288c6879c7c2b909ecf8ad4 2021-12-13 15:23:48 +0900 to 2022-01-05 05:45:21 +0900 - Fix typo / type error in FFI code example (rust-lang/nomicon#327) ## reference 8 commits in f8ba2f12df60ee19b96de24ae5b73af3de8a446b..4dee6eb63d728ffb9e7a2ed443e9ada9275c69d2 2022-01-03 11:02:08 -0800 to 2022-01-18 09:26:33 -0800 - (minor) Remove Expression Path sub-types splits in Pattern specs (rust-lang/reference#1138) - Document destructuring assignment (rust-lang/reference#1116) - Document the 2021 edition changes to macros-by-example `pat` metavariables (rust-lang/reference#1135) - Improve the documentation of macros-by-example metavariable names (rust-lang/reference#1130) - trait-bounds.md: add pronoun 'that' (rust-lang/reference#1131) - Say that macros-by-example `ident` metavariables can match raw identifiers (rust-lang/reference#1133) - State in the UAX31 profile description that a lone `_` is not an identifier (rust-lang/reference#1129) - Document syntax reserved in Rust 2021 (rust-lang/reference#1128) ## book 17 commits in d3740fb7aad0ea4a80ae20f64dee3a8cfc0c5c3c..f17df27fc14696912c48b8b7a7a8fa49e648088d 2022-01-03 21:46:04 -0500 to 2022-01-18 17:46:28 -0500 - Add a notice to the top of all nostarch snapshots - Fix quotes - Grammar (minor): 'or' → 'and' for enum variants - Propagate edits of chapter 8 to src - Replies to nostarch edits - more edits - ch8 from nostarch - Fix grammar and line wrapping - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/pr/2880' - Remove wikipedia link - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/pr/2927' - Snapshot of ch14 for nostarch - Backport fixes to chapter 14 noticed while doing nostarch snapshot - Fix usage of find piped into xargs - Adjust some more line numbers of Cargo.toml includes - Merge branch '2909' - Merge remote-tracking branch 'parkerziegler/fix/ch14-add-one-naming' ## rustc-dev-guide 7 commits in 875464457c4104686faf667f47848aa7b0f0a744..78dd6a4684cf8d6b72275fab6d0429ea40b66338 2021-12-28 22:17:49 -0600 to 2022-01-18 14:44:26 -0300 - Reorganize and expand the testing chapters. (rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide#1281) - Add inline assembly internals (rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide#1266) - Spelling: Rename `rust` to `Rust` (rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide#1288) - Clean up section about FCPs (rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide#1287) - Address more review comments in rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide#1286. - Address review comments in rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide#1286. - Streamline "Getting Started" some more.
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.
Closes #1072
I've tried doing it with explicit "Edition Differences" blocks.
I've included a change under Follow-set Ambiguity Restrictions too.
I took some of the wording from parts of PR #957 which were left out at the time.
Do you think it's worth adding a note mentioning that the relevant edition
is the one in effect where the macro is defined, as opposed to invoked?