Vadim Petrochenkov

>I would like to know how I can validate this inert/active distinction by reading the rustc code. If the attribute resolves to `Def::Macro`, then it's active. If the attribute resolves...

After https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79078 `derive` is a regular proc macro attribute without any special properties with regards to expansion order.

>I was thinking the "Definitions" chapter would list all the things that can introduce an identifier into scope. I think it would be good to have at least a list...

>Can we pick a better term than "name resolution"? In C++ it's officially called "name lookup", for example. >Do we want to call them "names" or "bindings"? I would personally...

This is a future-proofing kind of an error. The current implementation does not expand all the attributes in left-to-right fashion and if we put `#[my_awesome_macro]` after a derive it will...

The restriction is going to be removed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79078.

I found the `--"long-option"` form later, but the fact that the `--long-option` form is silently accepted while being incorrect is still a problem.

I have doubts that this "reduce special casing the compiler", `bool` is indeed special and built-in for the compiler in many senses. I suspect it would be much easier to...

Does making them `pub` help? (More precisely, making them nameable from outside of the crate.)

>The approach of making symbols public if pub and #[no_mangle] seems reasonable. Oh, this is great. What is done now (if I remember correctly), e.g. heuristic-based link-time visibility based on...