Add #![no_std]

[Zoxc]

No description provided.

[DanielKeep]

I'm knocking this back for now for two reasons:

• Although it isn't stated anywhere in this repo, I have crates of my own that depend on custom_derive and support back to Rust 1.2. no_std breaks everything prior to current stable. As such, it needs to be gated behind a feature.
• This patch doesn't compile at all, because enum_derive uses std::error, which isn't in core.

I stopped looking at that point.

I'm not closing this just yet, because I don't know what you want to do about this. I will say up-front that I'm a little leery of defining a custom Error trait, since it seems like that should be in libcore.

[Zoxc]

std::error::Error used to be in libcore but was moved out for technical reasons: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/src/std/up/src/libstd/error.rs.html#39

I doesn't seem very useful here so I just removed the impl onno_std.

[DanielKeep]

Ok, I've made a few amendments to the commit in the issue-9 branch, and just wanted to run them by you before merging.

I went from an optional no_std feature to a default-enabled std feature. This is because I feel Cargo features should generally be additive. In particular, that enabling a feature causes code to disappear seems weird and counter-intuitive. Also, I got this exchange when I asked on IRC about what was more appropriate:

no_std support: should I have an optional "no_std" feature that removes stuff, or a by-default "std" feature?
Quxxy: opt in to std
Quxxy: the former is inline with the no_std attribute in the language
never have a feature that removes things
er, in line?
10 seconds, two opposite answers. :D
because cargo features are a union of what all upstream dependencies ask for
^ I do not understand the aspect of cargo
so if foo wants some stuff, and bar asks your crate to remove that stuff instead
seems easily breakable
then foo won't have that stuff and shit will break
features can be mutually exclusive
cargo features should always only add features
different deps could use mutually exclusive features
scott: Except cargo doesn't work like that
it just unions the features
well, then quxxy should use the by-default "std" feature, right?

As an aside, if do you convince me to go back to no_std, I'll probably rename it to no-std in keeping with the std-unstable feature.

Aside from that, I'm fine with adding this to these crates (and so on to conv).

[DanielKeep]

Ok, I went through with the amendments and published a new version.