-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.1k
${count(t,)} is interpreted as ${count(t, 0)} #111904
Copy link
Copy link
Closed
Labels
C-bugCategory: This is a bug.Category: This is a bug.F-macro_metavar_expr`#![feature(macro_metavar_expr)]``#![feature(macro_metavar_expr)]`requires-nightlyThis issue requires a nightly compiler in some way. When possible, use a F-* label instead.This issue requires a nightly compiler in some way. When possible, use a F-* label instead.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
C-bugCategory: This is a bug.Category: This is a bug.F-macro_metavar_expr`#![feature(macro_metavar_expr)]``#![feature(macro_metavar_expr)]`requires-nightlyThis issue requires a nightly compiler in some way. When possible, use a F-* label instead.This issue requires a nightly compiler in some way. When possible, use a F-* label instead.
Type
Fields
Give feedbackNo fields configured for issues without a type.
I tried this code:
I expected to see this happen:
Either:
${count(t,)}is interpreted as${count(t)}, the macro call is expanded to4.Instead, this happened:
Compiled successfully,
${count(t,)}is interpreted as${count(t, 0)}, the macro call is expanded to2.This form of
${count()}metavar expression is not specified in RFC 3086, so this is more of an ask for clarification than a bug report.Meta
rustc --version --verbose:cc #83527
@rustbot label requires-nightly F-macro-metavar-expr