| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Hermit rwlocks are movable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 4 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #87819 (Use a more accurate span on assoc types WF checks)
- #87863 (Fix Windows Command::env("PATH"))
- #87885 (Link to edition guide instead of issues for 2021 lints.)
- #87941 (Fix/improve rustdoc-js tool)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
Fix Windows Command::env("PATH")
Fixes #87859
|
|
STD support for the ESP-IDF framework
Dear all,
This PR is implementing libStd support for the [ESP-IDF](https://github.com/espressif/esp-idf) newlib-based framework, which is the open source SDK provided by Espressif for their MCU family (esp32, esp32s2, esp32c3 and all other forthcoming ones).
Note that this PR has a [sibling PR](https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/pull/2310) against the libc crate, which implements proper declarations for all ESP-IDF APIs which are necessary for libStd support.
# Implementation approach
The ESP-IDF framework - despite being bare metal - offers a relatively complete POSIX API based on newlib. `pthread`, BSD sockets, file descriptors, and even a small file-system VFS layer. Perhaps the only significant exception is the lack of support for processes, which is to be expected of course on bare metal.
Therefore, the libStd support is implemented as a set of (hopefully small) changes to the `sys/unix` family of modules, in the form of conditional-compilation branches based either on `target_os = "espidf"` or in a couple of cases - based on `target_env = "newlib"` (the latter was already there actually and is not part of this patch).
The PR also contains two new targets:
- `riscv32imc-esp-espidf`
- `riscv32imac-esp-espidf`
... which are essentially copies of `riscv32imc-unknown-none-elf` and `riscv32imac-unknown-none-elf`, but enriched with proper `linker`, `linker_flavor`, `families`, `os`, `env` etc. specifications so that (a) the proper conditional compilation branches in libStd are selected when compiling with these targets and (b) the correct linker is used.
Since support for atomics is a precondition for libStd, the `riscv32imc-esp-espidf` target additionally is configured in such a way, so as to emit libcalls to the `__sync*` & `__atomic*` GCC functions, which are already implemented in the ESP-IDF framework. If this modification is not acceptable, we can also live with only the `riscv32imac-esp-espidf` target as well. While the RiscV chips of Espressif lack native atomics support, the relevant instructions are transparently emulated in the ESP-IDF framework using invalid instruction trap. This modification was implemented specifically with Rust support in mind.
# Target maintainers
In case this PR eventually gets merged, you can list myself as a Target Maintainer.
More importantly, Espressif (the chip vendor) is now actively involved and [embracing](https://github.com/espressif/rust-esp32-example/blob/main/docs/rust-on-xtensa.md) all [Rust-related efforts](https://github.com/esp-rs) which were originally a community effort. In light of that, I suppose `@MabezDev` - who initiated the Rust-on-Espressif efforts back in time and who now works for Espressif won't object to being listed as a maintainer as well.
**EDIT:** I was hinted (thanks, `@Urgau)` that answering the Tier 3 policy explicitly might be helpful. Answers below.
# Tier 3 Target Policy - answers
> A proposed target or target-specific patch that substantially changes code shared with other targets (not just target-specific code) must be reviewed and approved by the appropriate team for that shared code before acceptance.
Hopefully, the changes introduced by the ESP-IDF libStd support are rather on the small side. They are completely contained within the `sys/unix` set of modules (that is, aside from the obviously necessary one-liners in the `unwind` crate and in `build.rs`).
> A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
`@ivmarkov`
`@MabezDev`
> Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
The two introduced targets follow as much as possible the naming conventions of the other targets. I.e. taking the bare-metal `riscv32imac_unknown_none_elf` as a base:
* The name of the new target was derived by replacing `none` with `espidf` to designate the `target_os`.
* `_elf` was removed, as the non-bare metal targets seem not to have it
* `-newlib` was deliberately NOT added at the end, as I believe the chance of having two simultaneously active separate targets for the ESP-IDF framework with different C libraries (say, newlib vs musl) is way too small
* Finally, we replaced the middle `unknown` with `esp` which is kind of the name of the whole chipset MCU family (and abbreviation from Espressif which is too long). It will stay `esp` for all RiscV32-based MCUs of the company, as they all use the riscv32imc instruction set. By necessity however (disambiguation), it will be `esp32` or `esp32s2` or `esp32s3` for the Xtensa-based MCUs as all of these have their own variation of the Xtensa architecture. (The Xtensa targets are not part of this PR, even though they would use 1:1 the same LibStd implementation provided here, as they depend on the upstreaming of the Xtensa architecture support in LLVM; this upstreaming this is currently in progress.)
There was also a preceding discussion on the topic [here](https://github.com/espressif/rust-esp32-example/issues/14).
> Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
We are explicitly putting an `-espidf` suffix to designate that the target is *specifically* for Rust + ESP-IDF
> Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for Rust developers or users.
Agreed.
> The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
To the best of our knowledge, it doesn't.
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
MIT + Apache 2.0
> The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions (as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements.
Requirements are not changed for any other target.
> If the target supports building host tools (such as rustc or cargo), those host tools must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries, other than ordinary runtime libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other binaries built for the target. For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
The targets are for bare-metal environment which is not hosting build tools or a compiler.
> Targets should not require proprietary (non-FOSS) components to link a functional binary or library.
The linker used by the targets is the GCC linker from the GCC toolchain cross-compiled for riscv. GNU GPL.
> "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous" legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users.
> Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in discussions.
> This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
Agreed.
> Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those portions.
The targets implement libStd almost in its entirety, except for the missing support for process, as this is a bare metal platform. The process `sys\unix` module is currently stubbed to return "not implemented" errors.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target supports running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
Target does not (yet) support running tests. We would gladly provide all documentation how to build for the target (where?). It is currently hosted in this [README.md](https://github.com/ivmarkov/rust-esp32-std-hello) file, but will likely be moved to the [esp-rs](https://github.com/esp-rs) organization. Since the build for the target is driven by cargo and [all other tooling is downloaded automatically during the build](https://github.com/esp-rs/esp-idf-sys/blob/master/build.rs), there is no need for extensive documentation.
> Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular, do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via `@)` to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
Agreed.
> Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such notifications.
Agreed.
> Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2 or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3 target.
To the best of our knowledge, we believe we are not breaking any other target (be it tier 1, 2 or 3).
> In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
To the best of our knowledge, we have not introduced any unconditional use of a feature that affects any other target.
> If a tier 3 target stops meeting these requirements, or the target maintainers no longer have interest or time, or the target shows no signs of activity and has not built for some time, or removing the target would improve the quality of the Rust codebase, we may post a PR to remove it; any such PR will be CCed to the target maintainers (and potentially other people who have previously worked on the target), to check potential interest in improving the situation.
Agreed.
|
|
TryReserveErrorKind tests and inline
A small follow-up to #87408
|
|
Co-authored-by: Cheng XU <3105373+xu-cheng@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
r=joshtriplett
removed references to parent/child from std::thread documentation
- also clarifies how thread.join and detaching of threads works
- the previous prose implied that there is a relationship between a
spawning thread and the thread being spawned, and that "child" threads
couldn't outlive their "parents" unless detached, which is incorrect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replace read_to_string with read_line in Stdin example
The current example results in infinitely reading from stdin, which can confuse newcomers trying to read from stdin.
(`@razmag` encountered this while learning the language from the docs)
|
|
While going through the "The Rust Programming Language" book (Klabnik & Nichols), the TCP server example directs us to use TcpListener::incoming. I was curious how I could pass this value to a function (before reading ahead in the book), so I looked up the docs to determine the signature.
When I opened the docs, I found https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/net/struct.TcpListener.html#method.incoming, which didn't mention TcpStream anywhere in the example.
Eventually, I clicked on https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/net/struct.TcpListener.html#method.accept in the docs (after clicking a few other locations first), and was able to surmise that the value contained TcpStream.
## Opportunity
While this type is mentioned several times in this doc, I feel that someone should be able to fully use the results of the TcpListner::incoming iterator based solely on the docs of just this method.
## Implementation
I took the code from the top-level TcpListener https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/net/struct.TcpListener.html#method.incoming and blended it with the existing docs for TcpListener::incoming https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/net/struct.TcpListener.html#method.incoming.
It does make the example a little longer, and it also introduces a little duplication. It also gives the reader the type signatures they need to move on to the next step.
## Additional considerations
I noticed that in this doc, `handle_connection` and `handle_client` are both used to accept a TcpStream in the docs on this page. I want to standardize on one function name convention, so readers don't accidentally think two different concepts are being referenced. I didn't want to cram do too much in one PR, I can update this PR to make that change, or I could send another PR (if you would like).
First attempted contribution to Rust (and I'm also still very new, hence reading through the rust book for the first time)! Would you please let me know what you think?
|
|
As derived from extensive testing of `argv` in a C/C++ application.
Co-Authored-By: Jane Lusby <jlusby42@gmail.com>
|
|
This updates the tests to be consistent with argv in modern C/C++ applications.
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
impl Default, Copy, Clone for std::io::Sink and Empty
The omission of `Sink: Default` is causing me a slight inconvenience in a test harness. There seems little reason for this and `Empty` not to be `Clone` and `Copy` too.
I have made all three of these insta-stable, because:
AIUI `Copy` can only be derived, and I was not able to find any examples of how to unstably derive it. I think it is probably not possible.
I hunted through the git history for precedent and found
> 79b8ad84c84481a43704213cd0948d2ba0ea63b4
> Implement `Copy` for `IoSlice`
> https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/69403
which was also insta-stable.
|
|
Document that fs::read_dir skips . and ..
Hi,
I think this is worth noting in the docs since it differs from POSIX `readdir`. I didn’t put it under platform-specific notes because it seems to be consistent across platforms, and changing this behavior in the future could cause pretty nasty bugs.
Thanks!
|
|
- also clarifies how thread.join and detaching of threads works
- the previous prose implied that there is a relationship between a
spawning thread and the thread being spawned, and that "child" threads
couldn't outlive their parents unless detached, which is incorrect.
|
|
|
|
current_exe haiku code path simplification all of these part of libc
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Fix typo
Add missing "by".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #87561 (thread set_name haiku implementation.)
- #87715 (Add long error explanation for E0625)
- #87727 (explicit_generic_args_with_impl_trait: fix min expected number of generics)
- #87742 (Validate FFI-safety warnings on naked functions)
- #87756 (Add back -Zno-profiler-runtime)
- #87759 (Re-use std::sealed::Sealed in os/linux/process.)
- #87760 (Promote `aarch64-apple-ios-sim` to Tier 2)
- #87770 (permit drop impls with generic constants in where clauses)
- #87780 (alloc: Use intra doc links for the reserve function)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
alloc: Use intra doc links for the reserve function
The sentence exists to highlight the existence of a
performance footgun of repeated calls of the
reserve_exact function.
|
|
Re-use std::sealed::Sealed in os/linux/process.
This uses `std::sealed::Sealed` in `std::os::linux::process` instead of defining new `Sealed` traits there.
|
|
thread set_name haiku implementation.
|
|
r=Mark-Simulacrum
Ignore comments in tidy-filelength
Ref https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/60302#issuecomment-652402127
|
|
The sentence exists to highlight the existence of a
performance footgun of repeated calls of the
reserve_exact function.
|
|
rustc: Fill out remaining parts of C-unwind ABI
This commit intends to fill out some of the remaining pieces of the
C-unwind ABI. This has a number of other changes with it though to move
this design space forward a bit. Notably contained within here is:
* On `panic=unwind`, the `extern "C"` ABI is now considered as "may
unwind". This fixes a longstanding soundness issue where if you
`panic!()` in an `extern "C"` function defined in Rust that's actually
UB because the LLVM representation for the function has the `nounwind`
attribute, but then you unwind.
* Whether or not a function unwinds now mainly considers the ABI of the
function instead of first checking the panic strategy. This fixes a
miscompile of `extern "C-unwind"` with `panic=abort` because that ABI
can still unwind.
* The aborting stub for non-unwinding ABIs with `panic=unwind` has been
reimplemented. Previously this was done as a small tweak during MIR
generation, but this has been moved to a separate and dedicated MIR
pass. This new pass will, for appropriate functions and function
calls, insert a `cleanup` landing pad for any function call that may
unwind within a function that is itself not allowed to unwind. Note
that this subtly changes some behavior from before where previously on
an unwind which was caught-to-abort it would run active destructors in
the function, and now it simply immediately aborts the process.
* The `#[unwind]` attribute has been removed and all users in tests and
such are now using `C-unwind` and `#![feature(c_unwind)]`.
I think this is largely the last piece of the RFC to implement.
Unfortunately I believe this is still not stabilizable as-is because
activating the feature gate changes the behavior of the existing `extern
"C"` ABI in a way that has no replacement. My thinking for how to enable
this is that we add support for the `C-unwind` ABI on stable Rust first,
and then after it hits stable we change the behavior of the `C` ABI.
That way anyone straddling stable/beta/nightly can switch to `C-unwind`
safely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remove the aarch64 `crypto` target_feature
The subfeatures `aes` or `sha2` should be used instead.
This can't yet be done for ARM targets as some LLVM intrinsics still require `crypto`.
Also update the runtime feature detection tests in `library/std` to mirror the updates in `stdarch`. This also helps https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/86941
r? ``@Amanieu``
|
|
This commit intends to fill out some of the remaining pieces of the
C-unwind ABI. This has a number of other changes with it though to move
this design space forward a bit. Notably contained within here is:
* On `panic=unwind`, the `extern "C"` ABI is now considered as "may
unwind". This fixes a longstanding soundness issue where if you
`panic!()` in an `extern "C"` function defined in Rust that's actually
UB because the LLVM representation for the function has the `nounwind`
attribute, but then you unwind.
* Whether or not a function unwinds now mainly considers the ABI of the
function instead of first checking the panic strategy. This fixes a
miscompile of `extern "C-unwind"` with `panic=abort` because that ABI
can still unwind.
* The aborting stub for non-unwinding ABIs with `panic=unwind` has been
reimplemented. Previously this was done as a small tweak during MIR
generation, but this has been moved to a separate and dedicated MIR
pass. This new pass will, for appropriate functions and function
calls, insert a `cleanup` landing pad for any function call that may
unwind within a function that is itself not allowed to unwind. Note
that this subtly changes some behavior from before where previously on
an unwind which was caught-to-abort it would run active destructors in
the function, and now it simply immediately aborts the process.
* The `#[unwind]` attribute has been removed and all users in tests and
such are now using `C-unwind` and `#![feature(c_unwind)]`.
I think this is largely the last piece of the RFC to implement.
Unfortunately I believe this is still not stabilizable as-is because
activating the feature gate changes the behavior of the existing `extern
"C"` ABI in a way that has no replacement. My thinking for how to enable
this is that we add support for the `C-unwind` ABI on stable Rust first,
and then after it hits stable we change the behavior of the `C` ABI.
That way anyone straddling stable/beta/nightly can switch to `C-unwind`
safely.
|
|
|
|
Add convenience method for handling ipv4-mapped addresses by canonicalizing them
This simplifies checking common properties in an address-family-agnostic
way since #86335 commits to not checking IPv4 semantics
of IPv4-mapped addresses in the `Ipv6Addr` property methods.
|
|
Write docs for SyncOnceCell From and Default impl
Part of #51430
|
|
Commit to not supporting IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses
Stabilization of the `ip` feature has for a long time been blocked on the question of whether Rust should support handling "IPv4-in-IPv6" addresses: should the various `Ipv6Address` property methods take IPv4-mapped or IPv4-compatible addresses into account. See also the IPv4-in-IPv6 Address Support issue #85609 and #69772 which originally asked the question.
# Overview
In the recent PR #85655 I proposed changing `is_loopback` to take IPv4-mapped addresses into account, so `::ffff:127.0.0.1` would be recognized as a looback address. However, due to the points that came up in that PR, I alternatively propose the following: Keeping the current behaviour and commit to not assigning any special meaning for IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses, other than what the standards prescribe. This would apply to the stable method `is_loopback`, but also to currently unstable methods like `is_global` and `is_documentation` and any future methods. This is implemented in this PR as a change in documentation, specifically the following section:
> Both types of addresses are not assigned any special meaning by this implementation, other than what the relevant standards prescribe. This means that an address like `::ffff:127.0.0.1`, while representing an IPv4 loopback address, is not itself an IPv6 loopback address; only `::1` is. To handle these so called "IPv4-in-IPv6" addresses, they have to first be converted to their canonical IPv4 address.
# Discussion
In the discussion for or against supporting IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses the question what would be least surprising for users of other languages has come up several times. At first it seemed most big other languages supported IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses (or at least considered `::ffff:127.0.0.1` a loopback address). However after further investigation it appears that supporting IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses comes down to how a language represents addresses. .Net and Go do not have a separate type for IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, and do consider `::ffff:127.0.0.1` a loopback address. Java and Python, which do have separate types, do not consider `::ffff:127.0.0.1` a loopback address. Seeing as Rust has the separate `Ipv6Addr` type, it would make sense to also not support IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses. Note that this focuses on IPv4-mapped addresses, no other language handles IPv4-compatible addresses.
Another issue that was raised is how useful supporting these IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses would be in practice. Again with the example of `::ffff:127.0.0.1`, considering it a loopback address isn't too useful as to use it with most of the socket APIs it has to be converted to an IPv4 address anyway. From that perspective it would be better to instead provide better ways for doing this conversion like stabilizing `to_ipv4_mapped` or introducing a `to_canonical` method.
A point in favour of not supporting IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses is that that is the behaviour Rust has always had, and that supporting it would require changing already stable functions like `is_loopback`. This also keeps the documentation of these functions simpler, as we only have to refer to the relevant definitions in the IPv6 specification.
# Decision
To make progress on the `ip` feature, a decision needs to be made on whether or not to support IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses.
There are several options:
- Keep the current implementation and commit to never supporting IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses (accept this PR).
- Support IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses in some/all `IPv6Addr` methods (accept PR #85655).
- Keep the current implementation and but not commit to anything yet (reject both this PR and PR #85655), this entire issue will however come up again in the stabilization of several methods under the `ip` feature.
There are more options, like supporting IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses in `IpAddr` methods instead, but to my knowledge those haven't been seriously argued for by anyone.
There is currently an FCP ongoing on PR #85655. I would ask the libs team for an alternative FCP on this PR as well, which if completed means the rejection of PR #85655, and the decision to commit to not supporting IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses.
If anyone feels there is not enough evidence yet to make the decision for or against supporting IPv4-in-IPv6 addresses, let me know and I'll do whatever I can to resolve it.
|
|
This simplifies checking common properties in an address-family-agnostic
way since since #86335 commits to not checking IPv4 semantics
of IPv4-mapped addresses in the `Ipv6Addr` property methods.
|
|
but in case of failure (e.g. prcfs not mounted) still using
getexecname.
|
|
rfc3052 followup: Remove authors field from Cargo manifests
Since RFC 3052 soft deprecated the authors field, hiding it from
crates.io, docs.rs, and making Cargo not add it by default, and it is
not generally up to date/useful information for contributors, we may as well
remove it from crates in this repo.
|
|
Consistent spelling of "adapter" in the standard library
Change all occurrences of "(A|a)daptor" to "(A|a)dapter".
The spelling “adapter” seems to be significantly more common both in general in the English language and also in the `rust` repository and standard library. I don’t like the inconsistency that’s currently found on pages like https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/trait.Iterator.html. Note however that the Rust book consistently uses the spelling “iterator adaptor”.
Related discussion [on Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/219381-t-libs/topic/adapter.20.2F.20adaptor) ([in the archive](https://zulip-archive.rust-lang.org/219381tlibs/60284adapteradaptor.html)).
`@rustbot` label T-libs
|
|
Add documentation for `Ipv6MulticastScope`
Adds basic documentation to the unstable `Ipv6MulticastScope`, as well as marking it `#[non_exhaustive]` because future IETF RFCs may introduce additional scopes. The documentation mentions this in a section "Stability Guarantees":
> /// Not all possible values for a multicast scope have been assigned.
/// Future RFCs may introduce new scopes, which will be added as variants to this enum;
/// because of this the enum is marked as `#[non_exhaustive]`.
|
|
Move `os_str_bytes` to `sys::unix`
Followup to #84967, with `OsStrExt` and `OsStringExt` moved out of `sys_common`, there is no reason anymore for `os_str_bytes` to live in `sys_common` and not in sys. This pr moves it to the location `sys::unix::os_str` and reuses the code on other platforms via `#[path]` (as is common in `sys`) instead of importing.
|
|
Remove `Ipv4Addr::is_ietf_protocol_assignment`
This PR removes the unstable method `Ipv4Addr::is_ietf_protocol_assignment`, as I suggested in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85612#issuecomment-847863404. The method was added in #60145, as far as I can tell primarily for the implementation of `Ipv4Addr::is_global` (addresses reserved for IETF protocol assignment are not globally reachable unless otherwise specified).
The method was added in 2019, but I haven't been able to find any open-source code using this method so far. I'm also having a hard time coming up with a usecase for specifically this method; knowing that an address is reserved for future protocols doesn't allow you to do much with it, especially since now some of those addresses are indeed assigned to a protocol and have their own behaviour (and might even be defined to be globally reachable, so if that is what you care about it is always more accurate to call `!is_global()`, instead of `is_ietf_protocol_assignment()`).
Because of these reasons, I propose removing the method (or alternatively make it a private helper for `is_global`) and also not introduce `Ipv6Addr::is_ietf_protocol_assignment` and `IpAddr::is_ietf_protocol_assignment` in the future.
|
