Repository navigation
Tracking issue for #![feature(slice_patterns)] #62254
Description
This is a tracking issue for the feature gate #![feature(slice_patterns)] covering the following RFCs:
- "Finalize syntax for slice patterns with subslices" (RFC: Finalize syntax for slice patterns with subslices rfcs#2359),
- "Make
..a pattern syntactically" (Mini-RFC: Make..a pattern syntactically rfcs#2707), - "Array pattern adjustments" (RFC: Array pattern adjustments rfcs#495).
For the old tracking issue see #23121.
Steps:
- Implement the changes in RFC: Finalize syntax for slice patterns with subslices rfcs#2359 and Mini-RFC: Make
..a pattern syntactically rfcs#2707
(cc @rust-lang/compiler -- can anyone write up mentoring instructions?) - Adjust documentation (see instructions on rustc-guide)
- Reference documentation is tracked in Document subslice patterns reference#739.
- Rustc-guide documentation is tracked in Document slice patterns rustc-dev-guide#563.
- Book documentation in the book is tracked in Document subslice patterns book#2225.
- Stabilization PR (Stabilize
#![feature(slice_patterns)]in 1.42.0 #67712)
Unresolved questions:
None thus far.
Reacted by Esteban Kuber, Francisco Lopes, Dmytro Meleshko, Dror Levin, Dmitry Rusakov, Nova, Alex Macleod, Johannes Vollmer, Alexey Pyshnenko, Andor Polgár and 2 more
Reacted by Thomas Heartman, Dmitry Rusakov, Nova, Pyry Kontio, Alexey Pyshnenko and Paweł Karaś
Metadata
Metadata
Labels
Area: Slice patterns, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/23121Blocker: Approved by a merged RFC but not yet implemented.Blocker: Approved by a merged RFC and implemented but not stabilized.Blocker: Implemented in the nightly compiler and unstable.Category: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFC`#![feature(slice_patterns)]`Relevant to the language team
Activity
Rollup merge of rust-lang#62255 - Centril:slice-patterns-change-issue…
Rollup merge of rust-lang#62255 - Centril:slice-patterns-change-issue…
Rollup merge of rust-lang#62255 - Centril:slice-patterns-change-issue…
Centril commentedon Jul 6, 2019
For now, I'm working on the syntactic aspect of supporting
..as a valid pattern syntactic pattern.Rollup merge of rust-lang#62550 - Centril:rest-patterns, r=petrochenkov
Rollup merge of rust-lang#62550 - Centril:rest-patterns, r=petrochenkov
Rollup merge of rust-lang#62550 - Centril:rest-patterns, r=petrochenkov
Rollup merge of rust-lang#62550 - Centril:rest-patterns, r=petrochenkov
Centril commentedon Jul 28, 2019
The syntax change in rust-lang/rfcs#2707 was implemented on the 2019-07-28 in #62550 (author: @Centril, reviewer: @petrochenkov).
What remains now is:
Adding more tests for the syntax. Add syntactic and semantic tests for rest patterns, i.e.
..#63111Verifying the semantics in terms of type checking and making changes as needed. Subslice patterns: Test passing static & dynamic semantics. #63129
Before / during stabilization, we must also:
20 remaining items
Centril commentedon Dec 13, 2019
We discussed this briefly in Thursday's language team meeting. I basically informed those present (only 3, including me) of ^--- and our almost-readiness for stabilization.
Rollup merge of rust-lang#67318 - Centril:spdocs, r=matthewjasper
Rollup merge of rust-lang#67318 - Centril:spdocs, r=matthewjasper
Centril commentedon Dec 30, 2019
The stabilization PR and proposal is up in #67712.
Rollup merge of rust-lang#67712 - Centril:stabilize-slice_patterns, r…
Rollup merge of rust-lang#67712 - Centril:stabilize-slice_patterns, r…
Centril commentedon Jan 18, 2020
Subslice patterns were stabilized in #67712.
Reference documentation is tracked in rust-lang/reference#739.
Rustc-guide documentation is tracked in rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide#563.
Book documentation in the book is tracked in rust-lang/book#2225.
Merge #47
Merge #47
Makefile: do not compile rust/download_web with old toolchain
KSBilodeau commentedon Aug 30, 2023
As a clarification, concerns regarding #37854 were removed from this new issue list; Is there still a conflict of patterns?
matthewjasper commentedon Aug 31, 2023
There's no longer a conflict, this feature used to have an
[x..]syntax, but that's now been replaced by[x @ ..], which doesn't conflict (assuming full range patterns are never supported).