| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
Remove unnecessary bounds for some Hash{Map,Set} methods
This PR moves `HashMap::{into_keys,into_values,retain}` and `HashSet::retain` from `impl` blocks with `K: Eq + Hash, S: BuildHasher` into the blocks without them. It doesn't seem to me there is any reason these methods need to be bounded by that. This change brings `HashMap::{into_keys,into_values}` on par with `HashMap::{keys,values,values_mut}` which are not bounded either.
|
|
Stabilise entry_insert
This stabilises `HashMap:Entry::insert_entry` etc. Tracking issue #65225. It will need an FCP.
This was implemented in #64656 two years ago.
This PR includes the rename and change discussed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65225#issuecomment-910652430, happy to split if needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
JosephTLyons:update-HashMap-and-BTreeMap-documentation, r=yaahc
Update documentation to use `from()` to initialize `HashMap`s and `BTreeMap`s
As of Rust 1.56, `HashMap` and `BTreeMap` both have associated `from()` functions. I think using these in the documentation cleans things up a bit. It allows us to remove some of the `mut`s and avoids the Initialize-Then-Modify anti-pattern.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signed-off-by: Félix Saparelli <felix@passcod.name>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
r=joshtriplett
Add #[must_use] to core and std constructors
Parent issue: #89692
r? ``@joshtriplett``
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2229: Mark insignificant dtor in stdlib
I looked at all public [stdlib Drop implementations](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/ops/trait.Drop.html#implementors) and categorized them into Insigificant/Maybe/Significant Drop.
Reasons are noted here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19edb9r5lo2UqMrCOVjV0fwcSdS-R7qvKNL76q7tO8VA/edit#gid=1838773501
One thing missing from this PR is tagging HashMap as insigificant destructor as that needs some discussion.
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
cc `@nikomatsakis`
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fix typos “a”→“an”
Fix typos in comments; found using a regex to find some easy instance of incorrect usage of a vs. an.
While automation was used to find these, every change was checked manually.
Changes in submodules get separate PRs:
* https://github.com/rust-lang/stdarch/pull/1201
* https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/9821
* https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/pull/1874
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rls/pull/1746
* https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/9984
_folks @ rust-analyzer are fast at merging…_
* https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/9985
* https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/9987
* https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/9989
_For `clippy`, I don’t know if the changes should better better be moved to a PR to the original repo._
<hr>
This has some overlap with #88226, but neither is a strict superset of the other.
If you want multiple commits, I can split it up; in that case, make sure to suggest a criterion for splitting.
|
|
Add doctests for HashMap's into_values and into_keys methods
Fixes #87591
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stabilize Vec<T>::shrink_to
This PR stabilizes `shrink_to` feature and closes the corresponding issue. The second point was addressed already, and no `panic!` should occur.
Closes #56431.
|
|
|
|
Hide allocator details from TryReserveError
I think there's [no need for TryReserveError to carry detailed information](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48043#issuecomment-825139280), but I wouldn't want that issue to delay stabilization of the `try_reserve` feature.
So I'm proposing to stabilize `try_reserve` with a `TryReserveError` as an opaque structure, and if needed, expose error details later.
This PR moves the `enum` to an unstable inner `TryReserveErrorKind` that lives under a separate feature flag. `TryReserveErrorKind` could possibly be left as an implementation detail forever, and the `TryReserveError` get methods such as `allocation_size() -> Option<usize>` or `layout() -> Option<Layout>` instead, or the details could be dropped completely to make try-reserve errors just a unit struct, and thus smaller and cheaper.
|
|
r=Mark-Simulacrum
Ignore comments in tidy-filelength
Ref https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/60302#issuecomment-652402127
|
|
Use hashbrown's `extend_reserve()` in `HashMap`
When we added `extend_reserve()` to our implementation of `Extend` for `HashMap`, hashbrown didn't have a version we could use. Now that hashbrown has added it, we should use its version instead of implementing it ourself.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document iteration order of `retain` functions
For `HashSet` and `HashMap`, this simply copies the comment from
`BinaryHeap::retain`.
For `BTreeSet` and `BTreeMap`, this adds an additional guarantee that
wasn't previously documented. I think that because these data structures
are inherently ordered and other functions guarantee ordered iteration,
it makes sense to provide this guarantee for `retain` as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For `HashSet` and `HashMap`, this simply copies the comment from
`BinaryHeap::retain`.
For `BTreeSet` and `BTreeMap`, this adds an additional guarantee that
wasn't previously documented. I think that because these data structures
are inherently ordered and other functions guarantee ordered iteration,
it makes sense to provide this guarantee for `retain` as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stablize {HashMap,BTreeMap}::into_{keys,values}
I would propose to stabilize `{HashMap,BTreeMap}::into_{keys,values}`( aka. `map_into_keys_values`).
Closes #75294.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
