Skip to content

Document #[cfg(version(...))] #1828

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
30 changes: 30 additions & 0 deletions src/conditional-compilation.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -55,6 +55,11 @@ r[cfg.predicate.not]
r[cfg.predicate.literal]
* `true` or `false` literals, which are always true or false respectively.

r[cfg.predicate.version]
* `version()` with a version number inside. It is true if the language version
the compiler targets is higher or equal to the contained version number.
It is false otherwise.
Comment on lines +58 to +61
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This needs grammar, above, as for the other predicates.


r[cfg.option-spec]
_Configuration options_ are either names or key-value pairs, and are either set or unset.

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -299,6 +304,25 @@ r[cfg.proc_macro]
Set when the crate being compiled is being compiled with the `proc_macro`
[crate type].

r[cfg.version]
## The `version()` predicate
Comment on lines +307 to +308
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It seems a little confusing to have both this and cfg.predicate.version. I'm wondering if it would make sense to extend the "option" grammar to include version(...), and just remove cfg.predicate.version? Then version() would just be another option shown in the list here.

And the section header should probably be third level, and match the style of the other options.

Suggested change
r[cfg.version]
## The `version()` predicate
r[cfg.version]
### `version()`


r[cfg.version.behaviour]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Currently using American English for the reference.

Suggested change
r[cfg.version.behaviour]
r[cfg.version.behavior]

The `version()` predicate evaluates to true if both:

* The version number contained inside follows the format and
* The version number contained inside is less than or equal to the version
of the language the compiler targets. Usually the compiler version and
language version match. So compiler version `1.50.0` targets language
`1.50.0`.
Comment on lines +315 to +317
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Usually the reference focuses on the language and not specifics about the compiler or specific implementations. The text here seems a little confusing in that regard. I would probably just strike this content.

Suggested change
of the language the compiler targets. Usually the compiler version and
language version match. So compiler version `1.50.0` targets language
`1.50.0`.
of the language the compiler targets.


r[cfg.version.format]
In order for it to be considered of valid format, the version number has to
follow either the `"a.b.c"` scheme or the `"a.b"` scheme, where `a,b,c` are
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
follow either the `"a.b.c"` scheme or the `"a.b"` scheme, where `a,b,c` are
follow either the `"a.b.c"` scheme or the `"a.b"` scheme, where `a`, `b`, and `c` are

decimal integers between `0` and `65535`, inclusively. Semantically, assume `c`
to be 0 if not present. Order wise, version numbers behave as if they were
Rust tuples `(a,b,c)` with `a,b,c` being `u16` integers.

r[cfg.panic]
### `panic`

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -371,6 +395,12 @@ fn needs_not_foo() {
// ...
}

// This function is only included if the language version is newer than 1.50.0
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should this be "at least 1.50.0"? Or "greater than or equal to"?

#[cfg(version("1.50.0"))]
fn needs_new_compiler() {
// ...
}

// This function is only included when the panic strategy is set to unwind
#[cfg(panic = "unwind")]
fn when_unwinding() {
Expand Down
Loading