| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Rollup of 11 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #50987 (Underline multiple suggested replacements in the same line)
- #51014 (Add documentation about env! second argument)
- #51034 (Remove unused lowering field and method)
- #51047 (Use AllFacts from polonius-engine)
- #51048 (Add more missing examples for Formatter)
- #51056 (Mention and use `Once::new` instead of `ONCE_INIT`)
- #51059 (What does an expression look like, that consists only of special characters?)
- #51065 (Update nomicon link in transmute docs)
- #51067 (Add inner links in documentation)
- #51070 (Fail typecheck if we encounter a bogus break)
- #51073 (Rename TokenStream::empty to TokenStream::new)
Failed merges:
|
|
Add inner links in documentation
From [this SO question](https://stackoverflow.com/q/50518757/2733851) it looks like this page isn't really clear.
I personally do think this page is quite clear, the only think I could think of was adding some references.
|
|
std: Ensure OOM is classified as `nounwind`
OOM can't unwind today, and historically it's been optimized as if it can't
unwind. This accidentally regressed with recent changes to the OOM handler, so
this commit adds in a codegen test to assert that everything gets optimized away
after the OOM function is approrpiately classified as nounwind
Closes #50925
|
|
stabilize RangeBounds collections_range #30877
The FCP for #30877 closed last month, with the decision to:
1. move from `collections::range::RangeArgument` to `ops::RangeBounds`, and
2. rename `start()` and `end()` to `start_bounds()` and `end_bounds()`.
Simon Sapin already moved it to `ops::RangeBounds` in #49163.
I renamed the functions, and removed the old `collections::range::RangeArgument` alias.
This is my first Rust PR, please let me know if I can improve anything. This passes all tests for me, except the `clippy` tool (which uses `RangeArgument::start()`).
I considered deprecating `start()` and `end()` instead of removing them, but the contribution guidelines indicate we can break `clippy` temporarily. I thought it was best to remove the functions, since we're worried about name collisions with `Range::start` and `end`.
Closes #30877.
|
|
From [this SO question](https://stackoverflow.com/q/50518757/2733851) it looks like this page isn't really clear.
I personally do think this page is quite clear, the only think I could think of was adding some references.
|
|
OOM can't unwind today, and historically it's been optimized as if it can't
unwind. This accidentally regressed with recent changes to the OOM handler, so
this commit adds in a codegen test to assert that everything gets optimized away
after the OOM function is approrpiately classified as nounwind
Closes #50925
|
|
rename RangeBounds::start() -> start_bound()
rename RangeBounds::end() -> end_bound()
|
|
|
|
Stabilize feature from_ref
Function `from_ref_mut` is now renamed to `from_mut`, as discussed in #45703.
Closes #45703.
r? @SimonSapin
|
|
Escape combining characters in char::Debug
Although combining characters are technically printable, they make little sense to print on their own with `Debug`: it'd be better to escape them like non-printable characters.
This is a breaking change, but I imagine the fact `escape_debug` is rare and almost certainly primarily used for debugging that this is an acceptable change.
Resolves #41922.
r? @alexcrichton
cc @clarcharr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Switch Vec from doubling size on growth to using RawVec's reserve
On growth, Vec does not require to exactly double its size for correctness,
like, for example, VecDeque does.
Using reserve instead better expresses this intent. It also allows to reuse
Excess capacity on growth and for better growth-policies to be provided by
RawVec.
r? @sfackler
|
|
|
|
Switch to bootstrapping from 1.27
It's possible the Float trait could be removed from core, but I couldn't tell whether it was intended to be removed or not. @SimonSapin may be able to comment more here; we can presumably also do that in a follow up PR as this one is already quite large.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement From for more types on Cow
This is basically https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/48191, except that it should be implemented in a way that doesn't break third party crates.
|
|
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49137
|
|
On growth, Vec does not require to exactly double its size for correctness,
like, for example, VecDeque does.
Using reserve instead better expresses this intent. It also allows to reuse
Excess capacity on growth and for better growth-policies to be provided by
RawVec.
|
|
Don't allocate when creating an empty BTree
Following the discussion in #50266, this adds a static instance of `LeafNode` that empty BTrees point to, and then replaces it on `insert`, `append`, and `entry`. This avoids allocating for empty maps.
Fixes #50266
r? @Gankro
|
|
Attempting to fix https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/jobs/377407894 via some
selective ignoring tests
|
|
Restore RawVec::reserve* documentation
When the RawVec::try_reserve* methods were added, they took the place of
the ::reserve* methods in the source file, and new ::reserve* methods
wrapping the new try_reserve* methods were created. But the
documentation didn't move along, such that:
- reserve_* methods are barely documented.
- try_reserve_* methods have unmodified documentation from reserve_*,
such that their documentation indicate they are panicking/aborting.
This moves the documentation back to the right methods, with a
placeholder documentation for the try_reserve* methods.
|
|
Move "See also" disambiguation links for primitive types to top
Closes #50384.
<details>
<summary>Images</summary>
</details>
r? @steveklabnik
|
|
std: Avoid `ptr::copy` if unnecessary in `vec::Drain`
This commit is spawned out of a performance regression investigation in #50496.
In tracking down this regression it turned out that the `expand_statements`
function in the compiler was taking quite a long time. Further investigation
showed two key properties:
* The function was "fast" on glibc 2.24 and slow on glibc 2.23
* The hottest function was memmove from glibc
Combined together it looked like glibc gained an optimization to the memmove
function in 2.24. Ideally we don't want to rely on this optimization, so I
wanted to dig further to see what was happening.
The hottest part of `expand_statements` was `Drop for Drain` in the call to
`splice` where we insert new statements into the original vector. This *should*
be a cheap operation because we're draining and replacing iterators of the exact
same length, but under the hood memmove was being called a lot, causing a
slowdown on glibc 2.23.
It turns out that at least one of the optimizations in glibc 2.24 was that
`memmove` where the src/dst are equal becomes much faster. [This program][prog]
executes in ~2.5s against glibc 2.23 and ~0.3s against glibc 2.24, exhibiting
how glibc 2.24 is optimizing `memmove` if the src/dst are equal.
And all that brings us to what this commit itself is doing. The change here is
purely to `Drop for Drain` to avoid the call to `ptr::copy` if the region being
copied doesn't actually need to be copied. For normal usage of just `Drain`
itself this check isn't really necessary, but because `Splice` internally
contains `Drain` this provides a nice speed boost on glibc 2.23. Overall this
should fix the regression seen in #50496 on glibc 2.23 and also fix the
regression on Windows where `memmove` looks to not have this optimization.
Note that the way `splice` was called in `expand_statements` would cause a
quadratic number of elements to be copied via `memmove` which is likely why the
tuple-stress benchmark showed such a severe regression.
Closes #50496
[prog]: https://gist.github.com/alexcrichton/c05bc51c6771bba5ae5b57561a6c1cd3
|
|
Give SliceIndex impls a test suite of girth befitting the implementation (and fix a UTF8 boundary check)
So one day I was writing something in my codebase that basically amounted to `impl SliceIndex for (Bound<usize>, Bound<usize>)`, and I said to myself:
*Boy, gee, golly! I never realized bounds checking was so tricky!*
At some point when I had around 60 lines of tests for it, I decided to go see how the standard library does it to see if I missed any edge cases. ...That's when I discovered that libcore only had about 40 lines of tests for slicing altogether, and none of them even used `..=`.
---
This PR includes:
* **Literally the first appearance of the word `get_unchecked_mut` in any directory named `test` or `tests`.**
* Likewise the first appearance of `get_mut` used with _any type of range argument_ in these directories.
* Tests for the panics on overflow with `..=`.
* I wanted to test on `[(); usize::MAX]` as well but that takes linear time in debug mode </3
* A horrible and ugly test-generating macro for the `should_panic` tests that increases the DRYness by a single order of magnitude (which IMO wasn't enough, but I didn't want to go any further and risk making the tests inaccessible to next guy).
* Same stuff for str!
* Actually, the existing `str` tests were pretty good. I just helped filled in the holes.
* [A fix for the bug it caught](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/50002). (only one ~~sadly~~)
|
|
When the RawVec::try_reserve* methods were added, they took the place of
the ::reserve* methods in the source file, and new ::reserve* methods
wrapping the new try_reserve* methods were created. But the
documentation didn't move along, such that:
- reserve_* methods are barely documented.
- try_reserve_* methods have unmodified documentation from reserve_*,
such that their documentation indicate they are panicking/aborting.
This moves the documentation back to the right methods, with a
placeholder documentation for the try_reserve* methods.
|
|
|
|
This commit is spawned out of a performance regression investigation in #50496.
In tracking down this regression it turned out that the `expand_statements`
function in the compiler was taking quite a long time. Further investigation
showed two key properties:
* The function was "fast" on glibc 2.24 and slow on glibc 2.23
* The hottest function was memmove from glibc
Combined together it looked like glibc gained an optimization to the memmove
function in 2.24. Ideally we don't want to rely on this optimization, so I
wanted to dig further to see what was happening.
The hottest part of `expand_statements` was `Drop for Drain` in the call to
`splice` where we insert new statements into the original vector. This *should*
be a cheap operation because we're draining and replacing iterators of the exact
same length, but under the hood memmove was being called a lot, causing a
slowdown on glibc 2.23.
It turns out that at least one of the optimizations in glibc 2.24 was that
`memmove` where the src/dst are equal becomes much faster. [This program][prog]
executes in ~2.5s against glibc 2.23 and ~0.3s against glibc 2.24, exhibiting
how glibc 2.24 is optimizing `memmove` if the src/dst are equal.
And all that brings us to what this commit itself is doing. The change here is
purely to `Drop for Drain` to avoid the call to `ptr::copy` if the region being
copied doesn't actually need to be copied. For normal usage of just `Drain`
itself this check isn't really necessary, but because `Splice` internally
contains `Drain` this provides a nice speed boost on glibc 2.23. Overall this
should fix the regression seen in #50496 on glibc 2.23 and also fix the
regression on Windows where `memmove` looks to not have this optimization.
Note that the way `splice` was called in `expand_statements` would cause a
quadratic number of elements to be copied via `memmove` which is likely why the
tuple-stress benchmark showed such a severe regression.
Closes #50496
[prog]: https://gist.github.com/alexcrichton/c05bc51c6771bba5ae5b57561a6c1cd3
|
|
Cleanup a `use` in a raw_vec test
`allocator` is deprecated in favor of `alloc`, and `Alloc` is already imported
through `super::*`.
|
|
Add some explanations for #[must_use]
`#[must_use]` can be given a string argument which is shown whilst warning for things.
We should add a string argument to most of the user-exposed ones.
I added these for everything but the operators, mostly because I'm not sure what to write there or if we need anything there.
|
|
Make `String::new()` const
Following the steps of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/50233 , make `String::new()` a `const fn`.
|
|
|
|
Also remove some unnecessary debug_assert! when creating the shared
root, since the root should be stored in the rodata and thus be
impossible to accidentally modify.
|
|
Rename Pin to PinMut, and some more breaking changes
As discussed at [1] §3 and [2] and [3], a formal look at pinning requires considering a distinguished "shared pinned" mode/typestate. Given that, it seems desirable to at least eventually actually expose that typestate as a reference type. This renames Pin to PinMut, freeing the name Pin in case we want to use it for a shared pinned reference later on.
[1] https://www.ralfj.de/blog/2018/04/10/safe-intrusive-collections-with-pinning.html
[2] https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2349#issuecomment-379250361
[3] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49150#issuecomment-380488275
Cc @withoutboats
|
|
`allocator` is deprecated in favor of `alloc`, and `Alloc` is already imported
through `super::*`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This splits into_slices() into into_key_slice() and into_val_slice(). While the
extra calls would get optimized out, this is a useful semantic change since we
call keys() while iterating, and we don't want to construct and out-of-bounds
val() pointer in the process if we happen to be pointing to the shared static
root.
This also paves the way for doing the alignment handling conditional differently
for the keys and values.
|
|
We modify the drop implementation in IntoIter to not drop the shared root
|
|
This gives a pointer to that static empty node instead of allocating
a new node, and then whenever inserting makes sure that the root
isn't that empty node.
|
|
This way we can safely statically allocate a LeafNode to use as the
placeholder before allocating, and any type accessing it will be able to
access the metadata at the same offset.
|
|
|
|
As discussed at [1] §3 and [2] and [3], a formal look at pinning requires considering a
distinguished "shared pinned" mode/typestate. Given that, it seems desirable to
at least eventually actually expose that typestate as a reference type. This
renames Pin to PinMut, freeing the name Pin in case we want to use it for a
shared pinned reference later on.
[1] https://www.ralfj.de/blog/2018/04/10/safe-intrusive-collections-with-pinning.html
[2] https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2349#issuecomment-379250361
[3] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49150#issuecomment-380488275
|
|
The Option is always Some until drop, where it becomes None. Make
this more explicit and avoid unwraps by using ManuallyDrop.
This change should be performance-neutral as LLVM already optimizes
the unwraps away in the inlined code.
|
|
|
|
Introduce RangeInclusive::{new, start, end} methods and make the fields private.
cc #49022
|
|
stabilize `#[must_use]` for functions and must-use comparison operators (RFC 1940)
r? @nikomatsakis
|
