Lang/libs coordination question: okay for libs to stabilize traits with `final fn` in them?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 119k
- Forks
- 16.1k
- PR merge metrics
- PR metrics pending
Description
Filing this issue to get a definitive answer on whether @rust-lang/lang has any concerns about @rust-lang/libs-api stabilizing APIs in the standard library that use final fn.
If we stabilize such an API, that commits us to keeping this mechanism. That seems fine to me, as we have an accepted RFC and we seem to have a consistent expectation of shipping/stabilizing final fn.
Tracking issue for final fn: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131179
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with this coordination issue and the linked final fn tracking issue, #131179; no files or tests are named in the payload. Review the accepted RFC and the stated stabilization expectations, then determine whether the lang and libs-api teams have reached a definitive decision. Done means that the compatibility concern is answered.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100