Provide a macro like std::file!() just for the function name

[sdroege]

Having such a macro would be useful for adding context information to logs.

[Aatch]

This requires an RFC, as there's a fair bit of ambiguity as to what the "name" of a function might be.

[JustAPerson]

Whatever name is generated for debug symbols might be a start. When looking in gdb, those seem unambiguous after monomorphisation etc.

[steveklabnik]

Yes, new macros need to go through the RFC process, even for relatively trivial ones. See rust-lang/rfcs#1653 as an example. @sdroege please file one if you're interested in pursuing this!

[sdroege]

Thanks, I'll look into that!