| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41891
|
|
The docs currently say, "If the closure returns false, it will try
again, and call the closure on the next element." But this happens
regardless of whether the closure returns true or false.
|
|
|
|
RFC 2070 part 1: PanicInfo and Location API changes
This implements part of https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2070-panic-implementation.html
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44489
* Move `std::panic::PanicInfo` and `std::panic::Location` to a new `core::panic` module. The two types and the `std` module were already `#[stable]` and stay that way, the new `core` module is `#[unstable]`.
* Add a new `PanicInfo::message(&self) -> Option<&fmt::Arguments>` method, which is `#[unstable]`.
* Implement `Display` for `PanicInfo` and `Location`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47011.
|
|
Stabilized `#[repr(align(x))]` attribute (RFC 1358)
Stabilzed `#[repr(align(x))]` with attr_literal syntax as proposed by @eddyb https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33626#issuecomment-348467804
|
|
|
|
Make core::ops::Place an unsafe trait
Consumers of `Place` would reasonably expect that the `pointer` function returns a valid pointer to memory that can actually be written to.
|
|
|
|
Fix broken links to other slice functions in chunks/chunks_mut/exact_…
…chunk/exact_chunks_mut docs
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/47126#discussion_r162780492
|
|
fix doctests for BTreeSet to use BTreeSet (not BTreeMap)
This fixes #47624
|
|
Small improvements to the documentation of VecDeque.
Some small improvements to the documentation of `VecDeque`.
|
|
|
|
chunks/chunks_mut/exact_chunk/exact_chunks_mut docs
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/47126#discussion_r162780492
|
|
This fixes #47624
|
|
zackmdavis:and_the_case_of_the_needlessly_parenthesized_arguments, r=petrochenkov
in which the unused-parens lint comes to cover function and method args
Resolves #46137.
|
|
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47336
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/46952#issuecomment-353956225
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thew `_raw` prefix is included because the fact that `Box`’s ownership
semantics are "dissolved" or recreated seem more important than the exact
parameter type or return type.
|
|
|
|
`Shared` is now a deprecated `type` alias.
CC https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27730#issuecomment-352800629
|
|
|
|
Resolves #46137.
|
|
|
|
Add slice::ExactChunks and ::ExactChunksMut iterators
These guarantee that always the requested slice size will be returned
and any leftoever elements at the end will be ignored. It allows llvm to
get rid of bounds checks in the code using the iterator.
This is inspired by the same iterators provided by ndarray.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47115
I'll add unit tests for all this if the general idea and behaviour makes sense for everybody.
Also see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47115#issuecomment-354715511 for an example what this improves.
|
|
These are basically modified copies of the chunks/chunks_mut tests.
|
|
This way more useful information is printed if the test ever fails.
|
|
the compiler
And also link from the normal chunks iterator to the exact_chunks one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These guarantee that always the requested slice size will be returned
and any leftoever elements at the end will be ignored. It allows llvm to
get rid of bounds checks in the code using the iterator.
This is inspired by the same iterators provided by ndarray.
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47115
|
|
r=estebank
type error method suggestions use whitelisted identity-like conversions
Previously, on a type mismatch (and if this wasn't preëmpted by a
higher-priority suggestion), we would look for argumentless methods
returning the expected type, and list them in a `help` note. This had two
major shortcomings: firstly, a lot of the suggestions didn't really make
sense (if you used a &str where a String was expected,
`.to_ascii_uppercase()` is probably not the solution you were hoping
for). Secondly, we weren't generating suggestions from the most useful
traits! We address the first problem with an internal
`#[rustc_conversion_suggestion]` attribute meant to mark methods that keep
the "same value" in the relevant sense, just converting the type. We
address the second problem by making `FnCtxt.probe_for_return_type` pass
the `ProbeScope::AllTraits` to `probe_op`: this would seem to be safe
because grep reveals no other callers of `probe_for_return_type`.
Also, structured suggestions are pretty and good for RLS and friends.
Unfortunately, the trait probing is still not all one would hope for: at a
minimum, we don't know how to rule out `into()` in cases where it wouldn't
actually work, and we don't know how to rule in `.to_owned()` where it
would. Issues #46459 and #46460 have been filed and are ref'd in a FIXME.
This is hoped to resolve #42929, #44672, and #45777.
|
|
Deprecate [T]::rotate in favor of [T]::rotate_{left,right}.
Background
==========
Slices currently have an **unstable** [`rotate`] method which rotates
elements in the slice to the _left_ N positions. [Here][tracking] is the
tracking issue for this unstable feature.
```rust
let mut a = ['a', 'b' ,'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
a.rotate(2);
assert_eq!(a, ['c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'a', 'b']);
```
Proposal
========
Deprecate the [`rotate`] method and introduce `rotate_left` and
`rotate_right` methods.
```rust
let mut a = ['a', 'b' ,'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
a.rotate_left(2);
assert_eq!(a, ['c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'a', 'b']);
```
```rust
let mut a = ['a', 'b' ,'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
a.rotate_right(2);
assert_eq!(a, ['e', 'f', 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd']);
```
Justification
=============
I used this method today for my first time and (probably because I’m a
naive westerner who reads LTR) was surprised when the docs mentioned that
elements get rotated in a left-ward direction. I was in a situation
where I needed to shift elements in a right-ward direction and had to
context switch from the main problem I was working on and think how much
to rotate left in order to accomplish the right-ward rotation I needed.
Ruby’s `Array.rotate` shifts left-ward, Python’s `deque.rotate` shifts
right-ward. Both of their implementations allow passing negative numbers
to shift in the opposite direction respectively. The current `rotate`
implementation takes an unsigned integer argument which doesn't allow
the negative number behavior.
Introducing `rotate_left` and `rotate_right` would:
- remove ambiguity about direction (alleviating need to read docs 😉)
- make it easier for people who need to rotate right
[`rotate`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.slice.html#method.rotate
[tracking]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41891
|
|
|
|
Previously, on a type mismatch (and if this wasn't preëmpted by a
higher-priority suggestion), we would look for argumentless methods
returning the expected type, and list them in a `help` note.
This had two major shortcomings. Firstly, a lot of the suggestions didn't
really make sense (if you used a &str where a String was expected,
`.to_ascii_uppercase()` is probably not the solution you were hoping
for). Secondly, we weren't generating suggestions from the most useful
traits!
We address the first problem with an internal
`#[rustc_conversion_suggestion]` attribute meant to mark methods that keep
the "same value" in the relevant sense, just converting the type. We
address the second problem by making `FnCtxt.probe_for_return_type` pass
the `ProbeScope::AllTraits` to `probe_op`: this would seem to be safe
because grep reveals no other callers of `probe_for_return_type`.
Also, structured suggestions are preferred (because they're pretty, but
also for RLS and friends).
Also also, we make the E0055 autoderef recursion limit error use the
one-time-diagnostics set, because we can potentially hit the limit a lot
during probing. (Without this,
test/ui/did_you_mean/recursion_limit_deref.rs would report "aborting due to
51 errors").
Unfortunately, the trait probing is still not all one would hope for: at a
minimum, we don't know how to rule out `into()` in cases where it wouldn't
actually work, and we don't know how to rule in `.to_owned()` where it
would. Issues #46459 and #46460 have been filed and are ref'd in a FIXME.
This is hoped to resolve #42929, #44672, and #45777.
|
|
|
|
|
