| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
BTree: toughen panicky test of clone()
Test did not cover the second half of `clone_subtree` and why this clones key & value first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stabilize `impl From<[(K, V); N]> for HashMap` (and friends)
In addition to allowing HashMap to participate in Into/From conversion, this adds the long-requested ability to use constructor-like syntax for initializing a HashMap:
```rust
let map = HashMap::from([
(1, 2),
(3, 4),
(5, 6)
]);
```
This addition is highly motivated by existing precedence, e.g. it is already possible to similarly construct a Vec from a fixed-size array:
```rust
let vec = Vec::from([1, 2, 3]);
```
...and it is already possible to collect a Vec of tuples into a HashMap (and vice-versa):
```rust
let vec = Vec::from([(1, 2)]);
let map: HashMap<_, _> = vec.into_iter().collect();
let vec: Vec<(_, _)> = map.into_iter().collect();
```
...and of course it is likewise possible to collect a fixed-size array of tuples into a HashMap ([but not vice-versa just yet](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81615)):
```rust
let arr = [(1, 2)];
let map: HashMap<_, _> = std::array::IntoIter::new(arr).collect();
```
Therefore this addition seems like a no-brainer.
As for any impl, this would be insta-stable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add {BTreeMap,HashMap}::try_insert
`{BTreeMap,HashMap}::insert(key, new_val)` returns `Some(old_val)` if the key was already in the map. It's often useful to assert no duplicate values are inserted.
We experimented with `map.insert(key, val).unwrap_none()` (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/62633), but decided that that's not the kind of method we'd like to have on `Option`s.
`insert` always succeeds because it replaces the old value if it exists. One could argue that `insert()` is never the right method for panicking on duplicates, since already handles that case by replacing the value, only allowing you to panic after that already happened.
This PR adds a `try_insert` method that instead returns a `Result::Err` when the key already exists. This error contains both the `OccupiedEntry` and the value that was supposed to be inserted. This means that unwrapping that result gives more context:
```rust
map.insert(10, "world").unwrap_none();
// thread 'main' panicked at 'called `Option::unwrap_none()` on a `Some` value: "hello"', src/main.rs:8:29
```
```rust
map.try_insert(10, "world").unwrap();
// thread 'main' panicked at 'called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value:
// OccupiedError { key: 10, old_value: "hello", new_value: "world" }', src/main.rs:6:33
```
It also allows handling the failure in any other way, as you have full access to the `OccupiedEntry` and the value.
`try_insert` returns a reference to the value in case of success, making it an alternative to `.entry(key).or_insert(value)`.
r? ```@Amanieu```
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/3092
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTreeMap: correct node size test case for choices of B
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
|
|
Almost all safety comments are of the form `// SAFETY:`,
so normalize the rest and fix a few of them that should
have been a `/// # Safety` section instead.
Furthermore, make `tidy` only allow the uppercase form. While
currently `tidy` only checks `core`, it is a good idea to prevent
`core` from drifting to non-uppercase comments, so that later
we can start checking `alloc` etc. too.
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTreeMap: make Ord bound explicit, compile-test its absence
Most `BTreeMap` and `BTreeSet` members are subject to an `Ord` bound but a fair number of methods are not. To better convey and perhaps later tune the `Ord` bound, make it stand out in individual `where` clauses, instead of once far away at the beginning of an `impl` block. This PR does not introduce or remove any bounds.
Also adds compilation test cases checking that the bound doesn't creep in unintended on the historically unbounded methods.
|
|
This reverts commit 4fef39113a514bb270f5661a82fdba17d3e41dbb.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTreeMap: test split_off (and append) more thoroughly
Using DeterministicRng as a poor man's property based testing rig.
r? ``@Mark-Simulacrum``
|
|
BTreeMap: test full nodes a little more
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stabilize or_insert_with_key
Stabilizes the `or_insert_with_key` feature from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71024. This allows inserting key-derived values when a `HashMap`/`BTreeMap` entry is vacant.
The difference between this and `.or_insert_with(|| ... )` is that this provides a reference to the key to the closure after it is moved with `.entry(key_being_moved)`, avoiding the need to copy or clone the key.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTreeMap: fix minor testing mistakes in #78903
Mostly a duplicate test case
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTreeMap: test chaotic ordering & other bits & bobs
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTreeMap: split off most code of append
To complete #78056, move the last single-purpose pieces of code out of map.rs into a separate module. Also, tweaked documentation and safeness - I doubt think this code would be safe if the iterators passed in wouldn't be as sorted as the method says they should be - and bounds on MergeIterInner.
r? ```@Mark-Simulacrum```
|
|
BTreeMap: stop mistaking node for an orderly place
A second mistake in #77612 was to ignore the node module's rightful comment "this module doesn't care whether the entries are sorted". And there's a much simpler way to visit the keys in order, if you check this separately from a single pass checking everything.
r? ````````@Mark-Simulacrum````````
|
|
|
|
BTreeMap: document a curious assumption in test cases
r? ```@Mark-Simulacrum```
|
|
- BTreeMap::len
- BTreeMap::is_empty
- BTreeSet::len
- BTreeSet::is_empty
|
|
|
