Allow feature names to begin with numbers #1331
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
Diesel 1.2 had planned on renaming our `large-tables` and `huge-tables` features to `32-column-tables` and `64-column-tables` respectively, while also introducing the `128-column-tables` feature. This change was made several months ago in Diesel. Cargo will happily accept those as feature names, and resolve them properly from other crates. However while publishing Diesel 1.2, I ran into a snag mid-release when I realized that Cargo is incorrectly assuming that a feature name must be the same as a crate name. I suspect this is an artifact of the fact that feature names often are crate names (and perhaps in the past that was the only form of feature?). However, now they are an entirely separate thing, and we should allow the same set of feature names that Cargo does. (As an aside, do we want to apply the same 64 character limit that we apply to crate names to feature names?) Fixes rust-lang#1329.
sgrif
force-pushed
the
sg-allow-features-with-numbers
branch
from
711f849 to
4bf9efa
Compare
|
The workaround we had to do (putting an |
|
Before merging this, I'd like to make sure we're not removing an important restriction... but this restriction is from before my time. @alexcrichton do you recall why feature names have to be valid crate names (and have the restriction that they not start with a number)? It looks like |
To be clear, I don't think the current code is checking that the feature name is that of an existing crate, I think the code is checking that a valid feature name has the same restrictions as valid crate names. |
|
Crate names needed to not start with a number in the sense that they're Rust identifiers, and IIRC it was just easy to use the same validation for feature names. AFAIK feature names are always specified as strings or not interpreted in an identifier context so it should be fine to allow things like numbers out in front. |
|
Thanks @alexcrichton! I'm good with this then. Will comment again when I've got this deployed to prod. bors: r+ |
bors-voyager bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2018
1331: Allow feature names to begin with numbers r=carols10cents Diesel 1.2 had planned on renaming our `large-tables` and `huge-tables` features to `32-column-tables` and `64-column-tables` respectively, while also introducing the `128-column-tables` feature. This change was made several months ago in Diesel. Cargo will happily accept those as feature names, and resolve them properly from other crates. However while publishing Diesel 1.2, I ran into a snag mid-release when I realized that Cargo is incorrectly assuming that a feature name must be the same as a crate name. I suspect this is an artifact of the fact that feature names often are crate names (and perhaps in the past that was the only form of feature?). However, now they are an entirely separate thing, and we should allow the same set of feature names that Cargo does. (As an aside, do we want to apply the same 64 character limit that we apply to crate names to feature names?) Fixes #1329.
Build succeeded |
|
Deployed, and I was able to publish a crate with a feature that starts with a number! |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 15, 2020
Permit '+' in feature name, as in "c++20" Up front: I am familiar with the several discussions linked by rust-lang/crates-io-cargo-teams#41 (comment), and the conversation beginning at #1331 (comment). This PR is not motivated by attempting to match whatever behavior Cargo currently has. Instead, it's a small thing I think we can decide now whether to allow. But it's necessary to say no corresponding Cargo change is required to accommodate this crates.io change. This PR updates feature validation during publish to accept e.g. "c++20" and "dependency/c++20". We continue to not accept "c++20/feature" as the prefix before the slash would normally refer to a crate name of a dependency and a '+' would not be allowed in those. I am interested in using such feature names in https://github.com/dtolnay/cxx. In a Cargo.toml plusses appear as: ```toml [features] default = ["c++20"] "c++20" = ["my-dependency/c++20"] ``` To give some slight further justification for why this particular ascii character above other possible characters we might allow: `+` is pretty common in OS package names in a way that no other currently disallowed character is. Some examples pulled arbitrarily from `apt-cache pkgnames | rg '\+'`: - https://packages.debian.org/buster/dvd+rw-tools - https://packages.debian.org/buster/elpa-ghub+ - https://packages.debian.org/buster/libarpack++2-dev - https://packages.debian.org/buster/libdwarf++0 - https://packages.debian.org/buster/libelf++0 - https://packages.debian.org/buster/magics++ - https://packages.debian.org/buster/memtest86+ - https://packages.debian.org/buster/minisat+ - https://packages.debian.org/buster/paw++ - https://packages.debian.org/buster/swish++ - https://packages.debian.org/buster/vera++ - https://packages.debian.org/buster/voro++ The actual names of the projects contain `+`; various ones in the descriptions in the above links are styled as ARPACK++, Memtest86+, Magics++, Paw++, MinSat+, SWISH++, Vera++, Voro++. When binding to something like this behind a feature, using `+` in the feature name is the most intuitive.
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.
Diesel 1.2 had planned on renaming our
large-tablesandhuge-tablesfeatures to
32-column-tablesand64-column-tablesrespectively,while also introducing the
128-column-tablesfeature. This change wasmade several months ago in Diesel. Cargo will happily accept those
as feature names, and resolve them properly from other crates.
However while publishing Diesel 1.2, I ran into a snag mid-release when
I realized that Cargo is incorrectly assuming that a feature name must
be the same as a crate name. I suspect this is an artifact of the fact
that feature names often are crate names (and perhaps in the past that
was the only form of feature?).
However, now they are an entirely separate thing, and we should allow
the same set of feature names that Cargo does. (As an aside, do we want
to apply the same 64 character limit that we apply to crate names to
feature names?)
Fixes #1329.