Tracking issue for RFC 2523, #[cfg(version(..))] · Issue #64796 · rust-lang/rust (original) (raw)

Skip to content

Navigation Menu

• • GitHub Copilot Write better code with AI
  • GitHub Advanced Security Find and fix vulnerabilities
  • Actions Automate any workflow
  • Codespaces Instant dev environments
  • Issues Plan and track work
  • Code Review Manage code changes
  • Discussions Collaborate outside of code
  • Code Search Find more, search less
• Explore
  • Learning Pathways
  • Events & Webinars
  • Ebooks & Whitepapers
  • Customer Stories
  • Partners
  • Executive Insights
• • GitHub Sponsors Fund open source developers
  • The ReadME Project GitHub community articles
• • Enterprise platform AI-powered developer platform
• Pricing

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up

Description

This is a tracking issue for #[cfg(version(..))] (rust-lang/rfcs#2523).

Steps:

• Implement the RFC (cc @rust-lang/compiler -- can anyone write up mentoring instructions?)
• Adjust documentation (see instructions on rustc-guide)
• Stabilization PR (see instructions on rustc-guide)

Unresolved questions:

• What is cfg(version(...)) relative to in terms of nightly compilers?
  We could check against what rustc --version says, e.g. nightly being 1.40.0, beta being 1.39.0, and stable being 1.38.0. We could also have cfg(version(...)) at most be relative to the beta compiler. See the RFC for a longer discussion.
  • Resolved in Tracking issue for RFC 2523, #[cfg(version(..))] #64796 (comment)
• Should we also support version = "..." so that crates having a MSRV below when version(...) was stabilized can use the flag?
• Dependency updates cause language changes (src tarballs are vendored without respecting lockfile #79010)