---
# System prepended metadata

title: Open Discussion 27-10-2023
tags: [macros]

---

# Open Discussion 10-01-2024

People: Vincent, eholk, Trevor.

## Topics of discussion

- [#130856 - Tracking issue for `proc_macro` in non-`proc-macro` crates](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130856)
- [#130977 - Tracking issue for `proc_macro::ToTokens`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130977), which is related to the discussion on having a version of `quote` in the standard library: [Zulip link](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/404510-wg-macros/topic/Do.20you.20know.20that.20there.20is.20a.20version.20of.20.60quote.60.20in.20std.3F)
- [May we need a `c_stringify!` and `c_concat!` macros?](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/404510-wg-macros/topic/May.20we.20need.20a.20.60c_stringify!.60.20and.20.60c_concat!.60.20macros.3F) topic to the t-lib team.

## Notes

- [#130856 - Tracking issue for `proc_macro` in non-`proc-macro` crates](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130856)
    - See the full discussion in [zulip stream](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/404510-wg-macros/topic/Open.20Discussion.20-.2010.2F01.2F2024/near/474062511)
    - Next step could be: Starting the survey of the existing proc macro API would be good
    - Vincent proposed to be a possible owner of the project https://github.com/rust-lang/libs-team/issues/406 if the availability for him will not change in the near future

- [#130977 - Tracking issue for `proc_macro::ToTokens`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130977), which is related to the discussion on having a version of `quote` in the standard library: [Zulip link](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/404510-wg-macros/topic/Do.20you.20know.20that.20there.20is.20a.20version.20of.20.60quote.60.20in.20std.3F)
    - See the full discussion in the [zulip stream](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/404510-wg-macros/topic/Open.20Discussion.20-.2010.2F01.2F2024/near/474065699)
    - A possible option is to have an implementation for the current ACP before digging inside the repetition design problem;
    - Worth considering (offline) if there is something better than ToTokens here, or if it can be improved in any way, but I think it’s an improvement over using Into

- [May we need a `c_stringify!` and `c_concat!` macros?](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/404510-wg-macros/topic/May.20we.20need.20a.20.60c_stringify!.60.20and.20.60c_concat!.60.20macros.3F) topic to the t-lib team.
    - See the full discussion on [zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/404510-wg-macros/topic/Open.20Discussion.20-.2010.2F01.2F2024/near/474069564)
    -  ACP for t-libs-api would make sense.