fix: Remove implicit feature removal#14630
Merged
bors merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom Oct 1, 2024
Merged
Conversation
Due to problems we ran into with rust-lang#14016, we're removing implicit features from the 2024 edition to give ourselves more time to design it as we should. I could have added a new flag for this or made an EditionNext but I decided to remove it in the hopes to avoid any path dependency in solving this the next time.
Collaborator
rustbot
added
A-manifest
epage
force-pushed
the
implicit-removal
branch
from
263dc57 to
7be5a21
Compare
6 tasks
weihanglo
approved these changes
Oct 1, 2024
Member
weihanglo
left a comment
weihanglo
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Feel like code changes I have reviewed for this feature are more than this removal.
Anyway, thanks for taking care of this feature and hope we can get it done in the future!
Member
|
@bors r+ |
Contributor
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Contributor
Author
My hope is that feeling is coming from seeing PRs that tweaked existing behavior and that this also came with the introduction of a linting system. I looked through the "implemention" PRs on the tracking issue and this looked to be it. |
Contributor
Contributor
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 5, 2024
Update cargo 17 commits in 80d82ca22abbee5fb7b51fa1abeb1ae34e99e88a..ad074abe3a18ce8444c06f962ceecfd056acfc73 2024-09-27 17:56:01 +0000 to 2024-10-04 18:18:15 +0000 - test: Remove the last of our custom json assertions (rust-lang/cargo#14576) - docs(ref): Expand on MSRV (rust-lang/cargo#14636) - docs: Minor re-grouping of pages (rust-lang/cargo#14620) - docs(ref): Highleft whats left for msrv-policy (rust-lang/cargo#14638) - Fix `cargo:version_number` - has only one `:` (rust-lang/cargo#14637) - docs: Declare support level for each crate in our Charter / docs (rust-lang/cargo#14600) - chore(deps): update tar to 0.4.42 (rust-lang/cargo#14632) - docs(charter): Declare new Intentional Artifacts as 'small' changes (rust-lang/cargo#14599) - fix: Remove implicit feature removal (rust-lang/cargo#14630) - docs(config): make `--config <PATH>` more prominent (rust-lang/cargo#14631) - chore(deps): update rust crate unicode-width to 0.2.0 (rust-lang/cargo#14624) - chore(deps): update embarkstudios/cargo-deny-action action to v2 (rust-lang/cargo#14628) - docs(ref): Clean up language for `package.rust-version` (rust-lang/cargo#14619) - docs: clarify `target.'cfg(...)'` doesnt respect cfg from build script (rust-lang/cargo#14312) - test: relax compiler panic assertions (rust-lang/cargo#14618) - refactor(compiler): zero-copy deserialization when possible (rust-lang/cargo#14608) - test: add support for features in the sat resolver (rust-lang/cargo#14583)
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
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.
What does this PR try to resolve?
Due to problems we ran into with #14016, we're removing implicit features from the 2024 edition to give ourselves more time to design it as we should.
How should we test and review this PR?
Additional information
I could have added a new flag for this or made an EditionNext but I decided to remove it in the hopes to avoid any path dependency in solving this the next time.