Initiate the inner usage of `cfg_match` (Library) by c410-f3r · Pull Request #116342 · rust-lang/rust

@rustbot rustbot added O-unix

Operating system: Unix-like

O-wasi

Operating system: Wasi, Webassembly System Interface

O-wasm

Target: WASM (WebAssembly), http://webassembly.org/

O-windows

Operating system: Windows

S-waiting-on-review

Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.

T-libs

Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

labels

Oct 2, 2023

@c410-f3r c410-f3r changed the title Initiate the inner usage of cfg_match (Library) Initiate the inner usage of cfg_match (Library)

Oct 2, 2023

@bors 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-review

Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.

labels

Feb 18, 2024

CKingX added a commit to CKingX/rust that referenced this pull request

Feb 18, 2024

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request

Feb 19, 2024

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review

Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.

and removed S-waiting-on-bors

Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.

labels

Feb 19, 2024

@Dylan-DPC Dylan-DPC 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

Feb 20, 2024

@Dylan-DPC Dylan-DPC added the S-inactive

Status: Inactive and waiting on the author. This is often applied to closed PRs.

label

Feb 22, 2024

matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request

Jan 16, 2025
…joshtriplett

[cfg_match] Adjust syntax

A year has passed since the creation of rust-lang#115585 and the feature, as expected, is not moving forward. Let's change that.

This PR proposes changing the arm's syntax from  `cfg(SOME_CONDITION) => { ... }` to `SOME_CODITION => {}`.

```rust
match_cfg! {
   unix => {
        fn foo() { /* unix specific functionality */ }
    }
    target_pointer_width = "32" => {
        fn foo() { /* non-unix, 32-bit functionality */ }
    }
    _ => {
        fn foo() { /* fallback implementation */ }
    }
}
```

Why? Because after several manual migrations in rust-lang#116342 it became clear,  at least for me, that `cfg` prefixes are unnecessary, verbose and redundant.

Again, everything is just a proposal to move things forward. If the shown syntax isn't ideal, feel free to close this PR or suggest other alternatives.

matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request

Jan 16, 2025
…joshtriplett

[cfg_match] Adjust syntax

A year has passed since the creation of rust-lang#115585 and the feature, as expected, is not moving forward. Let's change that.

This PR proposes changing the arm's syntax from  `cfg(SOME_CONDITION) => { ... }` to `SOME_CODITION => {}`.

```rust
match_cfg! {
   unix => {
        fn foo() { /* unix specific functionality */ }
    }
    target_pointer_width = "32" => {
        fn foo() { /* non-unix, 32-bit functionality */ }
    }
    _ => {
        fn foo() { /* fallback implementation */ }
    }
}
```

Why? Because after several manual migrations in rust-lang#116342 it became clear,  at least for me, that `cfg` prefixes are unnecessary, verbose and redundant.

Again, everything is just a proposal to move things forward. If the shown syntax isn't ideal, feel free to close this PR or suggest other alternatives.

matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request

Jan 16, 2025
…joshtriplett

[cfg_match] Adjust syntax

A year has passed since the creation of rust-lang#115585 and the feature, as expected, is not moving forward. Let's change that.

This PR proposes changing the arm's syntax from  `cfg(SOME_CONDITION) => { ... }` to `SOME_CODITION => {}`.

```rust
match_cfg! {
   unix => {
        fn foo() { /* unix specific functionality */ }
    }
    target_pointer_width = "32" => {
        fn foo() { /* non-unix, 32-bit functionality */ }
    }
    _ => {
        fn foo() { /* fallback implementation */ }
    }
}
```

Why? Because after several manual migrations in rust-lang#116342 it became clear,  at least for me, that `cfg` prefixes are unnecessary, verbose and redundant.

Again, everything is just a proposal to move things forward. If the shown syntax isn't ideal, feel free to close this PR or suggest other alternatives.

rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request

Jan 16, 2025
Rollup merge of rust-lang#133720 - c410-f3r:cfg-match-foo-bar-baz, r=joshtriplett

[cfg_match] Adjust syntax

A year has passed since the creation of rust-lang#115585 and the feature, as expected, is not moving forward. Let's change that.

This PR proposes changing the arm's syntax from  `cfg(SOME_CONDITION) => { ... }` to `SOME_CODITION => {}`.

```rust
match_cfg! {
   unix => {
        fn foo() { /* unix specific functionality */ }
    }
    target_pointer_width = "32" => {
        fn foo() { /* non-unix, 32-bit functionality */ }
    }
    _ => {
        fn foo() { /* fallback implementation */ }
    }
}
```

Why? Because after several manual migrations in rust-lang#116342 it became clear,  at least for me, that `cfg` prefixes are unnecessary, verbose and redundant.

Again, everything is just a proposal to move things forward. If the shown syntax isn't ideal, feel free to close this PR or suggest other alternatives.

github-actions bot pushed a commit to tautschnig/verify-rust-std that referenced this pull request

Mar 11, 2025
…joshtriplett

[cfg_match] Adjust syntax

A year has passed since the creation of rust-lang#115585 and the feature, as expected, is not moving forward. Let's change that.

This PR proposes changing the arm's syntax from  `cfg(SOME_CONDITION) => { ... }` to `SOME_CODITION => {}`.

```rust
match_cfg! {
   unix => {
        fn foo() { /* unix specific functionality */ }
    }
    target_pointer_width = "32" => {
        fn foo() { /* non-unix, 32-bit functionality */ }
    }
    _ => {
        fn foo() { /* fallback implementation */ }
    }
}
```

Why? Because after several manual migrations in rust-lang#116342 it became clear,  at least for me, that `cfg` prefixes are unnecessary, verbose and redundant.

Again, everything is just a proposal to move things forward. If the shown syntax isn't ideal, feel free to close this PR or suggest other alternatives.