| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add slice::fill
Adds the `slice::fill` method to fill a slice with an item. This replaces manual for loops where items are copied one-by-one. This is a counterpart to C++20's [`std::fill`](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/fill) function.
## Usage
```rust
let mut buf = vec![0; 10];
buf.fill(1);
assert_eq!(buf, vec![1; 10]);
```
## Performance
When compiling in release mode, for `[u8]` and `[u16]` this method will optimize to a `memset(3)` call ([godbolt](https://godbolt.org/z/85El_c)). The initial implementation relies on LLVM's optimizer to make it as fast as possible for any given input. But as @jonas-schievink [pointed out](https://twitter.com/sheevink/status/1245756597453885442) this can later be optimized through specialization to guarantee it has a specific performance profile.
## Why now?
Conversations about adding `slice::fill` are not new. In fact, https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/2067 was opened 3 years ago about this exact topic. However discussion stranded while discussing implementation details, and it's not seen much forward motion since.
In ["The Hunt for the Fastest Zero"](https://travisdowns.github.io/blog/2020/01/20/zero.html) Travis Downs provides disects C++'s `std::fill` performance profile on gcc, comparing it among others to `memset(3)`. Even though `memset(3)` outperforms `std::fill` in their tests, the author notes the following:
> That the optimization fails, perhaps unexpectedly, in some cases is unfortunate but it’s nice that you can fix it yourself. [...] Do we throw out modern C++ idioms, at least where performance matters, for example by replacing std::fill with memset? I don’t think so.
Much of the article focuses on how how to fix the performance of `std::fill` by providing specializations for specific input. In Rust we don't have any dedicated methods to fill slices with values, so it either needs to be optimized at the MIR layer, or more likely rely on LLVM's optimizer.
By adding a dedicated method for filling slices with values it opens up the ability for us to in the future guarantee that e.g. `Vec<u8>` will always optimize to `memset` even in debug mode. Or perhaps provide stronger guarantees about memory when zeroing values when a certain flag is passed. But regardless of that, it improves general ergonomics of working with slices by providing a dedicated method with documentation and examples.
## References
- [slice-fill prototype on docs.rs](https://docs.rs/slice-fill/1.0.1/slice_fill/)
- [The Hunt For The Fastest Zero](https://travisdowns.github.io/blog/2020/01/20/zero.html)
- [Safe memset for slices](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/2067)
- [C++20 std::fill](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/fill)
- [ASM output on Godbolt](https://godbolt.org/z/5-XU66)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For all of the methods that pick off the first or last element, we can
use subslice patterns to implement them directly, rather than relying on
deeper indexing function calls. At a minimum, this means the generated
code will rely less on inlining for performance, but in some cases it
also optimizes better.
|
|
fix aliasing violation in align_to_mut
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/68549
I decided to add the testcase here to make it all one PR, but if you prefer I can also add that test case in the Miri repo instead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement split_inclusive for slice and str
# Overview
* Implement `split_inclusive` for `slice` and `str` and `split_inclusive_mut` for `slice`
* `split_inclusive` is a substring/subslice splitting iterator that includes the matched part in the iterated substrings as a terminator.
* EDIT: The behaviour has now changed, as per @KodrAus 's input, to the same semantics with the `split_terminator` function. I updated the examples below.
* Two examples below:
```Rust
let data = "\nMäry häd ä little lämb\nLittle lämb\n";
let split: Vec<&str> = data.split_inclusive('\n').collect();
assert_eq!(split, ["\n", "Märy häd ä little lämb\n", "Little lämb\n"]);
```
```Rust
let uppercase_separated = "SheePSharKTurtlECaT";
let mut first_char = true;
let split: Vec<&str> = uppercase_separated.split_inclusive(|c: char| {
let split = !first_char && c.is_uppercase();
first_char = split;
split
}).collect();
assert_eq!(split, ["SheeP", "SharK", "TurtlE", "CaT"]);
```
# Justification for the API
* I was surprised to find that stdlib currently only has splitting iterators that leave out the matched part. In my experience, wanting to leave a substring terminator as a part of the substring is a pretty common usecase.
* This API is strictly more expressive than the standard `split` API: it's easy to get the behaviour of `split` by mapping a subslicing operation that drops the terminator. On the other hand it's impossible to derive this behaviour from `split` without using hacky and brittle `unsafe` code. The normal way to achieve this functionality would be implementing the iterator yourself.
* Especially when dealing with mutable slices, the only way currently is to use `split_at_mut`. This API provides an ergonomic alternative that plays to the strengths of the iterating capabilities of Rust. (Using `split_at_mut` iteratively used to be a real pain before NLL, fortunately the situation is a bit better now.)
# Discussion items
* <s>Does it make sense to mimic `split_terminator` in that the final empty slice would be left off in case of the string/slice ending with a terminator? It might do, as this use case is naturally geared towards considering the matching part as a terminator instead of a separator.</s>
* EDIT: The behaviour was changed to mimic `split_terminator`.
* Does it make sense to have `split_inclusive_mut` for `&mut str`?
|
|
reverse iteration.
|
|
includes the matched part in the iterated substrings as a terminator.
|
|
|
|
`ptr` of `slice::Iter` and `slice::IterMut` can never be null, but this
fact wasn't exploited for layout optimizations. By changing `ptr` from
`*<mutability> T` to `NonNull<T>`, the compiler can now optimize layout
of `Option<Iter<'a, T>>`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
functions with a `const` modifier
|
|
This commit applies rustfmt with default settings to files in
src/libcore *that are not involved in any currently open PR* to minimize
merge conflicts. The list of files involved in open PRs was determined
by querying GitHub's GraphQL API with this script:
https://gist.github.com/dtolnay/aa9c34993dc051a4f344d1b10e4487e8
With the list of files from the script in `outstanding_files`, the
relevant commands were:
$ find src/libcore -name '*.rs' | xargs rustfmt --edition=2018
$ rg libcore outstanding_files | xargs git checkout --
Repeating this process several months apart should get us coverage of
most of the rest of libcore.
|
|
Have tidy ensure that we document all `unsafe` blocks in libcore
cc @rust-lang/libs
I documented a few and added ignore flags on the other files. We can incrementally document the files, but won't regress any files this way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2791 for motivation.
|
|
|
|
Remove manual unrolling from slice::Iter(Mut)::try_fold
While this definitely helps sometimes (particularly for trivial closures), it's also a pessimization sometimes, so it's better to leave this to (hypothetical) future LLVM improvements instead of forcing this on everyone.
I think it's better for the advice to be that sometimes you need to unroll manually than you sometimes need to not-unroll manually (like #64545).
---
For context see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/64572#issuecomment-532961046
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While this definitely helps sometimes (particularly for trivial closures), it's also a pessimization sometimes, so it's better to leave this to (hypothetical) future LLVM improvements instead of forcing this on everyone.
I think it's better for the advice to be that sometimes you need to unroll manually than you sometimes need to not-unroll manually (like #64545).
|
|
|
|
r=scottmcm
Implement `nth_back` for ChunksExactMut
This is a part of #54054.
r? @scottmcm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Improve `ptr_rotate` performance, tests, and benches
The corresponding issue is #61784. I am not actually sure if miri can handle the test, but I can change the commit if necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
relative links do not work because this is included in several places
|
|
Co-Authored-By: Mazdak Farrokhzad <twingoow@gmail.com>
|
|
|
|
squash of all commits for nth_back on ChunksMut
wip nth_back for chunks_mut
working chunksmut
fixed nth_back for chunksmut
Signed-off-by: wizAmit <amitforfriends_dns@yahoo.com>
r? @timvermeulen
r? @scottmcm
|
|
Rename .cap() methods to .capacity()
As mentioned in #60316, there are a few `.cap()` methods, which seem out-of-place because such methods are called `.capacity()` in the rest of the code.
This PR renames them to `.capacity()` but leaves `RawVec::cap()` in there for backwards compatibility.
I didn't try to mark the old version as "deprecated", because I guess this would cause too much noise.
|
