# Backlog Bonanza 2022-06-22

[GitHub query](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues?q=is%3Aopen+label%3AC-tracking-issue+label%3AT-lang)

## What are we DOING?

* Take things that have been unstable for a while and "disposition them".
* Goal: Everything that is nightly only has one or more of the following labels, indicating the blocker(s) to stabilizing it:
* S-tracking-ready-to-stabilize: Needs a stabilization PR (good to go :train:)
* S-tracking-needs-to-bake: Needs time to bake (set a date? other criteria?)
* S-tracking-impl-incomplete: Not code complete or blocking bugs
* S-tracking-unimplemented: Implementation not begun
* S-tracking-design-concerns: Blocking design concerns
* This might be "doesn't quite seem to deliver value we hoped for" or "something doesn't feel right"
* S-tracking-perma-unstable
* Internal implementation detail of rustc, stdlib
* S-tracking-needs-investigation

Attendance: Josh, Scott, Niko-ish, Mark

## Meta tracking issue for impl Trait #63066

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/63066

* Unclear if meta is useful, but for now whatever.
* impl incomplete

## Tracking issue for RFC 2574, "SIMD vectors in FFI" #63068

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/63068

* impl-incomplete, probably
* possibly some design concerns around whether our checks are good enough here
* but ultimately moving on

## Tracking issue for const fn type_name #63084

needs summary -- maybe ok, but Oli at least may have had concerns.

## Meta tracking issue for RFC 1892, "Deprecate uninitialized in favor of a new MaybeUninit type" #63566

We think this can be closed; there's no recent updates on it and it seems like individual components are already being tracked in individual tickets.

## Resolve unsound interaction between noalias and self-referential data (incl. generators, async fn) #63818

Not a tracking issue, untagged.

## Tracking issue for const fn pointers #63997

Needs summary. Probably just `const` fn ptr (like const dyn Fn) left.

## Tracking issue for RFC 2582, &raw [mut | const] $place (raw_ref_op) #64490

Didn't use this syntax for fun parsing issue reasons. Or maybe not.

S-needs-summary: is there anything blocking stabilization of the &raw syntax?

## Tracking issue for RFC 2523, #[cfg(accessible(::path::to::thing))] #64797

Some recent work to improve this. But probably just items only for now, no associated functions/etc?

Would be good to get an updated summary of what is supported. Maybe anything in `use ...`? We may wish to stabilize what is currently supported.

## Tracking issue for RFC 2523, #[cfg(version(..))] #64796

Blocked on accessible, but that might be soon ready to go.

## Tracking issue for const extern fn and const unsafe extern fn #64926

Marked as ready to stabilize, but otherwise not blocked.

## Tracking issue for rustc_reservation_impl attribute #64631

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/64631

## Tracking issue for reserved impl impl<T> From<!> for T #64715

Both of these are perma-unstable for now.

## Tracking issue for the "efiapi" calling convention #65815

impl-unstable

## Tracking issue for trait upcasting coercion #65991

Almost done, but needs some final consensus building/stabilization report.