const-check: stop recommending the use of rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable #141559
+41
−247
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
r? @fee1-dead rustbot has assigned @fee1-dead. Use |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
compiler-errors
approved these changes
May 25, 2025
| @@ -424,8 +424,7 @@ const_eval_unstable_in_stable_exposed = | |||
| .unstable_sugg = if the {$is_function_call2 -> | |||
| [true] caller | |||
| *[false] function | |||
| } is not (yet) meant to be exposed to stable, add `#[rustc_const_unstable]` (this is what you probably want to do) | |||
| .bypass_sugg = otherwise, as a last resort `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable]` can be used to bypass stability checks (this requires team approval) | |||
| } is not (yet) meant to be exposed to stable const contexts, add `#[rustc_const_unstable]` (this is what you probably want to do) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is the parenthetical necessary now, since there's no longer two alternatives?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wondered the same thing and thought it could still be useful... but OTOH when there's only one suggestion, then I guess "obviously" this is what one wants to do?
RalfJung
force-pushed
the
less-rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable
branch
from
a263cb1 to
cf9ac0e
Compare
|
@bors r=compiler-errors rollup |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
jhpratt
added a commit
to jhpratt/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 25, 2025
…_unstable, r=compiler-errors const-check: stop recommending the use of rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable I have seen way too many people see the compiler suggest this attribute and then just apply it without a second thought. This is bad. So let's just stop recommending it; for the rare case where someone needs it, they'll eventually ask us and that way we can be sure that it is truly needed. The dev-guide still also explains `rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable`. Cc `@rust-lang/wg-const-eval`
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 26, 2025
Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - #134696 (Implement `normalize_lexically`) - #138744 (Add methods to TCP and UDP sockets to modify hop limit (refresh of #94678)) - #140539 (Simplify `attribute_groups`) - #140863 ([rustdoc] Unify type aliases rendering with other ADT) - #140936 (Clarify WTF-8 safety docs) - #140952 (Specify that split_ascii_whitespace uses the same definition as is_ascii_whitespace) - #141472 (Attempt to improve the `std::fs::create_dir_all` docs related to atomicity) - #141502 (ci: move PR job x86_64-gnu-tools to codebuild) - #141559 (const-check: stop recommending the use of rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 26, 2025
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #134696 (Implement `normalize_lexically`) - #140539 (Simplify `attribute_groups`) - #140863 ([rustdoc] Unify type aliases rendering with other ADT) - #140936 (Clarify WTF-8 safety docs) - #140952 (Specify that split_ascii_whitespace uses the same definition as is_ascii_whitespace) - #141472 (Attempt to improve the `std::fs::create_dir_all` docs related to atomicity) - #141502 (ci: move PR job x86_64-gnu-tools to codebuild) - #141559 (const-check: stop recommending the use of rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 26, 2025
Rollup merge of #141559 - RalfJung:less-rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable, r=compiler-errors const-check: stop recommending the use of rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable I have seen way too many people see the compiler suggest this attribute and then just apply it without a second thought. This is bad. So let's just stop recommending it; for the rare case where someone needs it, they'll eventually ask us and that way we can be sure that it is truly needed. The dev-guide still also explains `rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable`. Cc ``@rust-lang/wg-const-eval``
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.
I have seen way too many people see the compiler suggest this attribute and then just apply it without a second thought. This is bad. So let's just stop recommending it; for the rare case where someone needs it, they'll eventually ask us and that way we can be sure that it is truly needed. The dev-guide still also explains
rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable.Cc @rust-lang/wg-const-eval