RFC 2008: Enum Variants #59376

davidtwco · 2019-03-23T02:17:59Z

Part of #44109. See Zulip topic for previous discussion.

davidtwco · 2019-03-23T02:19:28Z

I anticipate a lot of review comments so I'd appreciate any feedback and I'm happy to make any requested changes. I tried to split some of the later commits up to make it easier to review but unfortunately wasn't able to with the earlier commits that did the bulk of the refactoring.

petrochenkov · 2019-03-23T08:38:14Z

Looks like something went wrong during rebase because ppaux.rs and item_path.rs no longer exist on master.

petrochenkov · 2019-03-23T08:42:43Z

This work would benefit from splitting into two PRs - one for the DefId separation refactoring and no functional changes, and another for the non_exhaustive part.

davidtwco · 2019-03-23T10:07:19Z

Looks like something went wrong during rebase because ppaux.rs and item_path.rs no longer exist on master.

I may be mistaken, but isn’t this due to #58140 landing?

This work would benefit from splitting into two PRs - one for the DefId separation refactoring and no functional changes, and another for the non_exhaustive part.

I’ll split this into two PRs. I wanted to make the RFC 2008 changes on top so that I could confirm that the refactoring did work as expected.

petrochenkov · 2019-03-23T10:28:27Z

@davidtwco

I may be mistaken, but isn’t this due to #58140 landing?

Exactly.

davidtwco · 2019-03-23T10:30:45Z

Exactly.

~~Oh, I see. I didn’t realise this PR still had those files, will fix that too.~~ Fixed this in force push below.

davidtwco · 2019-03-23T11:55:11Z

Filed #59382 with the refactoring, marking this as S-blocked and will rebase atop master when/if #59382 lands.

@petrochenkov

Separate `DefId`s for variants and their constructors Part of #44109. Split off from #59376. See [Zulip topic](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/rfc-2008/near/132663140) for previous discussion. r? @petrochenkov

davidtwco · 2019-03-25T06:57:37Z

Rebased atop master now #59382 has landed, unblocked.

src/librustc/ty/mod.rs

src/librustc_metadata/decoder.rs

src/test/ui/rfc-2008-non-exhaustive/variant.rs

davidtwco · 2019-03-28T21:08:29Z

cc @rust-lang/rustdoc for the final commit which modifies rustdoc to extend existing non-exhaustive support to enum variants.

src/librustc_metadata/decoder.rs

petrochenkov · 2019-03-28T21:27:02Z

r=me for non-rustdoc changes
r? @QuietMisdreavus

This commit removes the check that disallows the `#[non_exhaustive]` attribute from being placed on enum variants and removes the associated tests. Further, this commit lowers the visibility of enum variant constructors when the variant is marked as non-exhaustive.

GuillaumeGomez · 2019-03-29T09:00:02Z

Does it generate a whole page for enum variants now?

This commit updates the unstable book and diagnostics to reflect that the `#[non_exhaustive]` attribute is now available for enum variants.

This commit adds support for non-exhaustive enum variants in rustdoc, extending the existing support for non-exhaustive enums and structs.

davidtwco · 2019-03-29T10:03:59Z

Does it generate a whole page for enum variants now?

@GuillaumeGomez When an enum variant is marked as #[non_exhaustive], such as below:

enum Foo {
    #[non_exhaustive]
    Unit,
    #[non_exhaustive]
    Tuple(u8, u8),
    #[non_exhaustive]
    Struct { x: u8, y: u8 },
}

Then it is displayed like this:

This expands to:

For reference, here are the equivalent messages for structs (expanded) and enums (expanded).

All that the final commit of this PR does is add support for these messages and make it so that the non-exhaustive sections always start collapsed (since they're a lot of repetitive text otherwise).

GuillaumeGomez · 2019-03-29T13:24:11Z

Ah I see! Looks good to me then.

QuietMisdreavus · 2019-03-29T14:00:38Z

Rustdoc code looks good. Thanks for the screenshots!

@bors r=petrochenkov,QuietMisdreavus

bors · 2019-03-29T14:00:39Z

📌 Commit 49a6da2 has been approved by petrochenkov,QuietMisdreavus

@petrochenkov

…, r=petrochenkov,QuietMisdreavus RFC 2008: Enum Variants Part of rust-lang#44109. See [Zulip topic](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/rfc-2008/near/132663140) for previous discussion. r? @petrochenkov cc @nikomatsakis

@petrochenkov

…, r=petrochenkov,QuietMisdreavus RFC 2008: Enum Variants Part of rust-lang#44109. See [Zulip topic](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/rfc-2008/near/132663140) for previous discussion. r? @petrochenkov cc @nikomatsakis

@ghost

Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - #59376 (RFC 2008: Enum Variants) - #59453 (Recover from parse error in tuple syntax) - #59455 (Account for short-hand field syntax when suggesting borrow) - #59499 (Fix broken download link in the armhf-gnu image) - #59512 (implement `AsRawFd` for stdio locks) - #59525 (Whitelist some rustc attrs) - #59528 (Improve the dbg! macro docs ) - #59532 (In doc examples, don't ignore read/write results) - #59534 (rustdoc: collapse blanket impls in the same way as normal impls) - #59537 (Fix OnceWith docstring.) Failed merges: r? @ghost

@davidtwco

Fix cross-crate visibility of fictive variant constructors After merging rust-lang#59376 I realized that the code in the decoder wasn't entirely correct - we "decoded" fictive variant constructors with their variant's visibility, which could be public, rather than demoted to `pub(crate)`. Fictive constructors are not directly usable in expression/patterns, but the effect still can be observed with imports. r? @davidtwco

@davidtwco

Fix cross-crate visibility of fictive variant constructors After merging rust-lang#59376 I realized that the code in the decoder wasn't entirely correct - we "decoded" fictive variant constructors with their variant's visibility, which could be public, rather than demoted to `pub(crate)`. Fictive constructors are not directly usable in expression/patterns, but the effect still can be observed with imports. r? @davidtwco

rust-highfive assigned petrochenkov Mar 23, 2019

rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Mar 23, 2019

petrochenkov added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Mar 23, 2019

davidtwco force-pushed the finally-rfc-2008-variants branch 2 times, most recently from 516fadf to fa89ba1 Compare March 23, 2019 11:51

davidtwco mentioned this pull request Mar 23, 2019

Separate DefIds for variants and their constructors #59382

Merged

davidtwco added S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Mar 23, 2019

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

davidtwco force-pushed the finally-rfc-2008-variants branch 2 times, most recently from 516f410 to 1b382f3 Compare March 24, 2019 20:01

davidtwco force-pushed the finally-rfc-2008-variants branch from 1b382f3 to 147a385 Compare March 25, 2019 06:56

davidtwco added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. labels Mar 25, 2019

petrochenkov reviewed Mar 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

src/librustc/ty/mod.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

petrochenkov reviewed Mar 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

src/librustc_metadata/decoder.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

petrochenkov reviewed Mar 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

src/test/ui/rfc-2008-non-exhaustive/variant.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

petrochenkov added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Mar 26, 2019

Add comments for new AdtDef functions.

4187560

davidtwco force-pushed the finally-rfc-2008-variants branch from 08c4943 to 07de867 Compare March 28, 2019 21:05

petrochenkov reviewed Mar 28, 2019

View reviewed changes

src/librustc_metadata/decoder.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

rust-highfive assigned QuietMisdreavus and unassigned petrochenkov Mar 28, 2019

davidtwco force-pushed the finally-rfc-2008-variants branch from 07de867 to 4de38fa Compare March 28, 2019 21:29

davidtwco added 2 commits March 29, 2019 11:03

Update documentation.

1893841

This commit updates the unstable book and diagnostics to reflect that the `#[non_exhaustive]` attribute is now available for enum variants.

Support non-exhaustive enum variants in rustdoc.

49a6da2

This commit adds support for non-exhaustive enum variants in rustdoc, extending the existing support for non-exhaustive enums and structs.

davidtwco force-pushed the finally-rfc-2008-variants branch from 4de38fa to 49a6da2 Compare March 29, 2019 10:03

bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Mar 29, 2019

Centril mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2019

Rollup of 11 pull requests #59538

Closed

Centril mentioned this pull request Mar 30, 2019

Rollup of 10 pull requests #59550

Merged

bors merged commit 49a6da2 into rust-lang:master Mar 30, 2019

davidtwco mentioned this pull request Mar 30, 2019

Tracking issue for RFC 2008: Future-proofing enums/structs with #[non_exhaustive] attribute #44109

Closed

7 tasks

davidtwco deleted the finally-rfc-2008-variants branch March 30, 2019 18:02

petrochenkov mentioned this pull request Apr 13, 2019

Fix cross-crate visibility of fictive variant constructors #59936

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

RFC 2008: Enum Variants #59376

RFC 2008: Enum Variants #59376

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019

petrochenkov commented Mar 23, 2019

petrochenkov commented Mar 23, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019

petrochenkov commented Mar 23, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019 •

edited

Loading

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019 •

edited

Loading

This comment has been minimized.

davidtwco commented Mar 25, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 28, 2019 •

edited

Loading

petrochenkov commented Mar 28, 2019

GuillaumeGomez commented Mar 29, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 29, 2019

GuillaumeGomez commented Mar 29, 2019

QuietMisdreavus commented Mar 29, 2019

bors commented Mar 29, 2019

RFC 2008: Enum Variants #59376

RFC 2008: Enum Variants #59376

Conversation

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019

petrochenkov commented Mar 23, 2019

petrochenkov commented Mar 23, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019

petrochenkov commented Mar 23, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019 • edited Loading

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019 • edited Loading

This comment has been minimized.

davidtwco commented Mar 25, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 28, 2019 • edited Loading

petrochenkov commented Mar 28, 2019

GuillaumeGomez commented Mar 29, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 29, 2019

GuillaumeGomez commented Mar 29, 2019

QuietMisdreavus commented Mar 29, 2019

bors commented Mar 29, 2019

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019 •

edited

Loading

davidtwco commented Mar 23, 2019 •

edited

Loading

davidtwco commented Mar 28, 2019 •

edited

Loading