Forbid constructing empty identifiers from concat_idents #50406
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
I think @rust-highfive doesn't like me for some reason. Is my username triggering some XSS filter or something? (or perhaps not; it looks like my luck with the robot has been about 50/50 in recent PRs) |
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
dtolnay
reviewed
May 3, 2018
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please also update the patterns in libcore/macros.rs and libstd/macros.rs because they currently imply that 0 idents would be accepted.
macro_rules! concat_idents {
($($e:ident),*) => ({ /* compiler built-in */ });
($($e:ident,)*) => ({ /* compiler built-in */ });
}
kennytm
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 8e38d02 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
kennytm
added a commit
to kennytm/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 3, 2018
Forbid constructing empty identifiers from concat_idents The empty identifier is a [reserved identifier](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/8a37c75a3a661385cc607d934c70e86a9eaf5fd7/src/libsyntax_pos/symbol.rs#L300-L305) in rust, apparently used for black magicks like representing the crate root or somesuch... and therefore, being able to construct it is Ungood. Presumably. ...even if the macro that lets you construct it is so useless that you can't actually do any damage with it. (and believe me, I tried) Fixes rust-lang#50403. **Note:** I noticed that when you try to do something similar with `proc_macro::Term`, the compiler actually catches it and flags the identifier as reserved. Perhaps a better solution would be to somehow have that same check applied here.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 3, 2018
Rollup of 12 pull requests Successful merges: - #50302 (Add query search order check) - #50320 (Fix invalid path generation in rustdoc search) - #50349 (Rename "show type declaration" to "show declaration") - #50360 (Clarify wordings of the `unstable_name_collision` lint.) - #50365 (Use two vectors in nearest_common_ancestor.) - #50393 (Allow unaligned reads in constants) - #50401 (Revert "Implement FromStr for PathBuf") - #50406 (Forbid constructing empty identifiers from concat_idents) - #50407 (Always inline simple BytePos and CharPos methods.) - #50416 (check if the token is a lifetime before parsing) - #50417 (Update Cargo) - #50421 (Fix ICE when using a..=b in a closure.) Failed merges:
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
The empty identifier is a reserved identifier in rust, apparently used for black magicks like representing the crate root or somesuch... and therefore, being able to construct it is Ungood. Presumably.
...even if the macro that lets you construct it is so useless that you can't actually do any damage with it. (and believe me, I tried)
Fixes #50403.
Note: I noticed that when you try to do something similar with
proc_macro::Term, the compiler actually catches it and flags the identifier as reserved. Perhaps a better solution would be to somehow have that same check applied here.