Rollup merge of #138632 - clubby789:stabilize-cfg-boolean-lit, r=davidtwco,Urgau,traviscross

Stabilize `cfg_boolean_literals`

Closes #131204
`@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated
This will end up conflicting with the test in #138293 so whichever doesn't land first will need updating

--

# Stabilization Report

## General design

### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized?

[RFC 3695](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695), none.

### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con.

None

### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those?

None

## Has a call-for-testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received?

Yes; only positive feedback was received.

## Implementation quality

### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs)

Implemented in [#131034](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131034).

### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature

- [Basic usage, including `#[cfg()]`, `cfg!()` and `#[cfg_attr()]`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/true-false.rs)
- [`--cfg=true/false` on the command line being accessible via `r#true/r#false`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/raw-true-false.rs)
- [Interaction with the unstable `#[doc(cfg(..))]` feature](6d71251/tests/rustdoc-ui/cfg-boolean-literal.rs)
- [Denying `--check-cfg=cfg(true/false)`](6d71251/tests/ui/check-cfg/invalid-arguments.rs)
- Ensuring `--cfg false` on the command line doesn't change the meaning of `cfg(false)`: `tests/ui/cfg/cmdline-false.rs`
- Ensuring both `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)` on the same item result in it being disabled: `tests/ui/cfg/both-true-false.rs`

### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking?

The above mentioned issue; it should not block as it interacts with another unstable feature.

### What FIXMEs are still in the code for that feature and why is it ok to leave them there?

None

### Summarize contributors to the feature by name for recognition and assuredness that people involved in the feature agree with stabilization
- `@clubby789` (RFC)
- `@Urgau` (Implementation in rustc)

### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done?

`rustdoc`'s  unstable`#[doc(cfg(..)]` has been updated to respect it. `cargo` has been updated with a forward compatibility lint to enable supporting it in cargo once stabilized.

## Type system and execution rules

### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist)

A few lines to be added to the reference for configuration predicates, specified in the RFC.

tests/pretty/ast-stmt-expr-attr.rs

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 fn main() {}
 
-#[cfg(FALSE)]
+#[cfg(false)]
 fn syntax() {
     let _ = #[attr] [];
     let _ = #[attr] [0];

tests/pretty/enum-variant-vis.rs

@@ -4,5 +4,5 @@
 
 fn main() {}
 
-#[cfg(FALSE)]
+#[cfg(false)]
 enum Foo { pub V, }

tests/pretty/if-attr.rs

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 //@ pp-exact
 
-#[cfg(FALSE)]
+#[cfg(false)]
 fn simple_attr() {
 
     #[attr]
@@ -10,21 +10,21 @@ fn simple_attr() {
     if true {}
 }
 
-#[cfg(FALSE)]
+#[cfg(false)]
 fn if_else_chain() {
 
     #[first_attr]
     if true {} else if false {} else {}
 }
 
-#[cfg(FALSE)]
+#[cfg(false)]
 fn if_let() {
 
     #[attr]
     if let Some(_) = Some(true) {}
 }
 
-#[cfg(FALSE)]
+#[cfg(false)]
 fn let_attr_if() {
     let _ = #[attr] if let _ = 0 {};
     let _ = #[attr] if true {};

tests/pretty/nested-item-vis-defaultness.rs

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 
 fn main() {}
 
-#[cfg(FALSE)]
+#[cfg(false)]
 extern "C" {
     static X: u8;
     type X;
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ extern "C" {
     pub fn foo();
 }
 
-#[cfg(FALSE)]
+#[cfg(false)]
 trait T {
     const X: u8;
     type X;
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ trait T {
     pub default fn foo();
 }
 
-#[cfg(FALSE)]
+#[cfg(false)]
 impl T for S {
     const X: u8;
     type X;