You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
rust-lang/rfcs#3722 seems likely to land albeit for some future edition beyond 2024, and when it does I would propose we remove the existing ABI prescriptions from the Style Guide text
Formatters (at least rustfmt) do not necessarily have the relevant context to know whether formatting changes that involved the ABI would be semantics preserving, and the behavior that matched the "always be explicit" rule in the Style Guide did cause a couple of issues over the years (e.g. rust-lang/rustfmt#2908)
Once rust-lang/rfcs#3722 is enacted I think rustfmt should fallback to just maintaining ABI as it exists within the AST, and leave the consideration of whether an ABI has a default and/or is required as a lang item
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
rust-lang/rfcs#3722 seems likely to land albeit for some future edition beyond 2024, and when it does I would propose we remove the existing ABI prescriptions from the Style Guide text
Formatters (at least rustfmt) do not necessarily have the relevant context to know whether formatting changes that involved the ABI would be semantics preserving, and the behavior that matched the "always be explicit" rule in the Style Guide did cause a couple of issues over the years (e.g. rust-lang/rustfmt#2908)
Once rust-lang/rfcs#3722 is enacted I think rustfmt should fallback to just maintaining ABI as it exists within the AST, and leave the consideration of whether an ABI has a default and/or is required as a lang item
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: