|
8 | 8 | // option. This file may not be copied, modified, or distributed |
9 | 9 | // except according to those terms. |
10 | 10 |
|
11 | | -// This is a comprehensive test of invocations with and without |
| 11 | +// This is meant to be a comprehensive test of invocations with/without |
12 | 12 | // trailing commas (or other, similar optionally-trailing separators). |
13 | 13 | // Every macro is accounted for, even those not tested in this file. |
14 | 14 | // (There will be a note indicating why). |
15 | | -// |
16 | | -// The expectation is for this to be updated as new macros are added, |
17 | | -// or as functionality is added to existing macros. |
18 | | -// |
19 | | -// (FIXME: (please discuss in PR) is the above expectation reasonable?) |
20 | 15 |
|
21 | 16 | // std and core are both tested because they may contain separate |
22 | 17 | // implementations for some macro_rules! macros as an implementation |
@@ -245,16 +240,7 @@ fn println() { |
245 | 240 | println!("hello {}", "world",); |
246 | 241 | } |
247 | 242 |
|
248 | | -// FIXME: select! (please discuss in PR) |
249 | | -// |
250 | | -// Test cases for select! are obnoxiously large, see here: |
251 | | -// |
252 | | -// https://github.com/ExpHP/rust-macro-comma-test/blob/0062e75e01ab/src/main.rs#L190-L250 |
253 | | -// |
254 | | -// and due to other usability issues described there, it is unclear to me that it is |
255 | | -// going anywhere in its current state. This is a job far too big for a macro_rules! macro, |
256 | | -// and for as long as it exists in this form it will have many many problems far worse than |
257 | | -// just lack of trailing comma support. |
| 243 | +// select! is too troublesome and unlikely to be stabilized |
258 | 244 |
|
259 | 245 | // stringify! is N/A |
260 | 246 |
|
|
0 commit comments