In the adding-macros-to-the-AST problem that keeps coming up: Does the 'unrelated' code generally run pre-macroexpansion, or post-?
If the answer is 'post-macroexpansion', there may be an argument to be made for splitting the AST types apart? Glenn On Mar 4, 2013, at 9:17 AM, Paul Stansifer wrote: > I'm afraid it's not primarily a parsing issue; it has to do with the Rust > implementation, in particular that the same AST type holds pre-expanded code > (potentially containing macro invocations) and post-expanded code (in which > macro invocations must not be present). Changing the identifier type to be > either-an-identifier-or-a-macro-invocation-producing-an-identifier would > affect way too much unrelated code. There are a number of ways around the > problem, but we need to decide which one to do. > > Paul > !DSPAM:5134d6db129152042218820! > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev > > > !DSPAM:5134d6db129152042218820! _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
