| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All other tests of libcore reside in the tests/ directory,
too. Apparently the tests of `time.rs` weren't run before, at
least not by `x.py test src/libcore`.
|
|
|
|
Added new()/start()/end() methods to RangeInclusive.
Changed the lowering of `..=` to use RangeInclusive::new().
|
|
core: Fix overflow in `int::mod_euc` when `self < 0 && rhs == MIN`
This commit removes usage of `abs`, which overflows when `self == MIN`.
|
|
Deprecate Read::chars and char::decode_utf8
Per FCP:
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27802#issuecomment-377537778
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33906#issuecomment-377534308
|
|
Add Cell::update
This commit adds a new method `Cell::update`, which applies a function to the value inside the cell.
Previously discussed in: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/2171
### Motivation
Updating `Cell`s is currently a bit verbose. Here are several real examples (taken from rustc and crossbeam):
```rust
self.print_fuel.set(self.print_fuel.get() + 1);
self.diverges.set(self.diverges.get() | Diverges::Always);
let guard_count = self.guard_count.get();
self.guard_count.set(guard_count.checked_add(1).unwrap());
if guard_count == 0 {
// ...
}
```
With the addition of the new method `Cell::update`, this code can be simplified to:
```rust
self.print_fuel.update(|x| x + 1);
self.diverges.update(|x| x | Diverges::Always);
if self.guard_count.update(|x| x.checked_add(1).unwrap()) == 1 {
// ...
}
```
### Unresolved questions
1. Should we return the old value instead of the new value (like in `fetch_add` and `fetch_update`)?
2. Should the return type simply be `()`?
3. Naming: `update` vs `modify` vs `mutate` etc.
cc @SimonSapin
|
|
|
|
Add inherent methods in libcore for [T], [u8], str, f32, and f64
# Background
Primitive types are defined by the language, they don’t have a type definition like `pub struct Foo { … }` in any crate. So they don’t “belong” to any crate as far as `impl` coherence is concerned, and on principle no crate would be able to define inherent methods for them, without a trait. Since we want these types to have inherent methods anyway, the standard library (with cooperation from the compiler) bends this rule with code like [`#[lang = "u8"] impl u8 { /*…*/ }`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/1.25.0/src/libcore/num/mod.rs#L2244-L2245). The `#[lang]` attribute is permanently-unstable and never intended to be used outside of the standard library.
Each lang item can only be defined once. Before this PR there is one impl-coherence-rule-bending lang item per primitive type (plus one for `[u8]`, which overlaps with `[T]`). And so one `impl` block each. These blocks for `str`, `[T]` and `[u8]` are in liballoc rather than libcore because *some* of the methods (like `<[T]>::to_vec(&self) -> Vec<T> where T: Clone`) need a global memory allocator which we don’t want to make a requirement in libcore. Similarly, `impl f32` and `impl f64` are in libstd because some of the methods are based on FFI calls to C’s `libm` and we want, as much as possible, libcore not to require “runtime support”.
In libcore, the methods of `str` and `[T]` that don’t allocate are made available through two **unstable traits** `StrExt` and `SliceExt` (so the traits can’t be *named* by programs on the Stable release channel) that have **stable methods** and are re-exported in the libcore prelude (so that programs on Stable can *call* these methods anyway). Non-allocating `[u8]` methods are not available in libcore: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/45803. Some `f32` and `f64` methods are in an unstable `core::num::Float` trait with stable methods, but that one is **not in the libcore prelude**. (So as far as Stable programs are concerns it doesn’t exist, and I don’t know what the point was to mark these methods `#[stable]`.)
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/32110 is the tracking issue for these unstable traits.
# High-level proposal
Since the standard library is already bending the rules, why not bend them *a little more*? By defining a few additional lang items, the compiler can allow the standard library to have *two* `impl` blocks (in different crates) for some primitive types.
The `StrExt` and `SliceExt` traits still exist for now so that we can bootstrap from a previous-version compiler that doesn’t have these lang items yet, but they can be removed in next release cycle. (`Float` is used internally and needs to be public for libcore unit tests, but was already `#[doc(hidden)]`.) I don’t know if https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/32110 should be closed by this PR, or only when the traits are entirely removed after we make a new bootstrap compiler.
# Float methods
Among the methods of the `core::num::Float` trait, three are based on LLVM intrinsics: `abs`, `signum`, and `powi`. PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/27823 “Remove dependencies on libm functions from libcore” moved a bunch of `core::num::Float` methods back to libstd, but left these three behind. However they aren’t specifically discussed in the PR thread. The `compiler_builtins` crate defines `__powisf2` and `__powidf2` functions that look like implementations of `powi`, but I couldn’t find a connection with the `llvm.powi.f32` and `llvm.powi.f32` intrinsics by grepping through LLVM’s code.
In discussion starting at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/32110#issuecomment-370647922 Alex says that we do not want methods in libcore that require “runtime support”, but it’s not clear whether that applies to these `abs`, `signum`, or `powi`. In doubt, I’ve **removed** them for the trait and moved them to inherent methods in libstd for now. We can move them back later (or in this PR) if we decide that’s appropriate.
# Change details
For users on the Stable release channel:
* I believe this PR does not make any breaking change
* Some methods for `[u8]`, `f32`, and `f64` are newly available to `#![no_std]` users (fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/45803)
* There should be no visible change for `std` users in terms of what programs compile or what their behavior is. (Only in compiler error messages, possibly.)
For Nightly users, additionally:
* The unstable `StrExt` and `SliceExt` traits are gone
* Their methods are now inherent methods of `str` and `[T]` (so only code that explicitly named the traits should be affected, not "normal" method calls)
* The `abs`, `signum` and `powi` methods of the `Float` trait are gone
* The `Float` trait’s unstable feature name changed to `float_internals` with no associated tracking issue, to reflect it being a permanently unstable implementation detail rather than a public API on a path to stabilization.
* Its remaining methods are now inherent methods of `f32` and `f64`.
-----
CC @rust-lang/libs for the API changes, @rust-lang/compiler for the new lang items
|
|
`Float` still needs to be public for libcore unit tests.
|
|
This reverts commit e53a2a72743810e05f58c61c9d8a4c89b712ad2e.
|
|
Per FCP:
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27802#issuecomment-377537778
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33906#issuecomment-377534308
|
|
|
|
|
|
Move deny(warnings) into rustbuild
This permits easier iteration without having to worry about warnings
being denied.
Fixes #49517
|
|
See #49775 for some more information but it looks like this is working around an
LLVM bug for the time being.
Closes #49775
|
|
This permits easier iteration without having to worry about warnings
being denied.
Fixes #49517
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holy cow that's a lot of `cfg(stage0)` removed and a lot of new stable language
features!
|
|
Stabilize iterator methods in 1.27
- Closes #39480, feature `iter_rfind`
- `DoubleEndedIterator::rfind`
- Closes #44705, feature `iter_rfold`
- `DoubleEndedIterator::rfold`
- Closes #45594, feature `iterator_try_fold`
- `Iterator::try_fold`
- `Iterator::try_for_each`
- `DoubleEndedIterator::try_rfold`
|
|
Add Iterator::find_map
I'd like to propose to add `find_map` method to the `Iterator`: an occasionally useful utility, which relates to `filter_map` in the same way that `find` relates to `filter`.
`find_map` takes an `Option`-returning function, applies it to the elements of the iterator, and returns the first non-`None` result. In other words, `find_map(f) == filter_map(f).next()`.
Why do we want to add a function to the `Iterator`, which can be trivially expressed as a combination of existing ones? Observe that `find(f) == filter(f).next()`, so, by the same logic, `find` itself is unnecessary!
The more positive argument is that desugaring of `find[_map]` in terms of `filter[_map]().next()` is not super obvious, because the `filter` operation reads as if it is applies to the whole collection, although in reality we are interested only in the first element. That is, the jump from "I need a **single** result" to "let's use a function which maps **many** values to **many** values" is a non-trivial speed-bump, and causes friction when reading and writing code.
Does the need for `find_map` arise in practice? Yes!
* Anecdotally, I've more than once searched the docs for the function with `[T] -> (T -> Option<U>) -> Option<U>` signature.
* The direct cause for this PR was [this](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/5187/files/1291c50e86ed4b31db0c76de03a47a5d0074bbd7#r174934173) discussion in Cargo, which boils down to "there's some pattern that we try to express here, but current approaches looks non-pretty" (and the pattern is `filter_map`
* There are several `filter_map().next` combos in Cargo: [[1]](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/blob/545a4a2c930916cc9c3dc1716fb7a33299e4062b/src/cargo/ops/cargo_new.rs#L585), [[2]](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/blob/545a4a2c930916cc9c3dc1716fb7a33299e4062b/src/cargo/core/resolver/mod.rs#L1130), [[3]](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/blob/545a4a2c930916cc9c3dc1716fb7a33299e4062b/src/cargo/ops/cargo_rustc/mod.rs#L1086).
* I've also needed similar functionality in `Kotlin` several times. There, it is expressed as `mapNotNull {}.firstOrNull`, as can be seen [here](https://github.com/intellij-rust/intellij-rust/blob/ee8bdb4e073fd07142fc6e1853ca288c57495e69/src/main/kotlin/org/rust/cargo/project/model/impl/CargoProjectImpl.kt#L154), [here](https://github.com/intellij-rust/intellij-rust/blob/ee8bdb4e073fd07142fc6e1853ca288c57495e69/src/main/kotlin/org/rust/lang/core/resolve/ImplLookup.kt#L444) [here](https://github.com/intellij-rust/intellij-rust/blob/ee8bdb4e073fd07142fc6e1853ca288c57495e69/src/main/kotlin/org/rust/ide/inspections/RsLint.kt#L38) and [here](https://github.com/intellij-rust/intellij-rust/blob/ee8bdb4e073fd07142fc6e1853ca288c57495e69/src/main/kotlin/org/rust/cargo/toolchain/RustToolchain.kt#L74) (and maybe in some other cases as well)
Note that it is definitely not among the most popular functions (it definitely is less popular than `find`), but, for example it (in case of Cargo) seems to be more popular than `rposition` (1 occurrence), `step_by` (zero occurrences) and `nth` (three occurrences as `nth(0)` which probably should be replaced with `next`).
Do we necessary need this function in `std`? Could we move it to itertools? That is possible, but observe that `filter`, `filter_map`, `find` and `find_map` together really form a complete table:
|||
|-------|---------|
| filter| find|
|filter_map|find_map|
It would be somewhat unsatisfying to have one quarter of this table live elsewhere :) Also, if `Itertools` adds an `find_map` method, it would be more difficult to move it to std due to name collision.
Hm, at this point I've searched for `filter_map` the umpteenth time, and, strangely, this time I do find this RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1801. I guess this could be an implementation though? :)
To sum up:
Pro:
- complete the symmetry with existing method
- codify a somewhat common non-obvious pattern
Contra:
- niche use case
- we can, and do, live without it
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
portability lint
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/49305#issuecomment-376293243
|
|
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33417
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add 12 num::NonZero* types for primitive integers, deprecate core::nonzero
RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2307
Tracking issue: ~~https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27730~~ https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49137
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27730
|
|
Deprecate the AsciiExt trait in favor of inherent methods
The trait and some of its methods are stable and will remain.
Some of the newer methods are unstable and can be removed later.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/39658
|
|
The trait and some of its methods are stable and will remain.
Some of the newer methods are unstable and can be removed later.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/39658
|
|
Merge `feature(advanced_slice_patterns)` into `feature(slice_patterns)`
|
|
Remove or hide deprecated unstable SipHasher{13,24}
Deprecated since Rust 1.13.0.
|
|
Add hexadecimal formatting of integers with fmt::Debug
This can be used for integers within a larger types which implements Debug (possibly through derive) but not fmt::UpperHex or fmt::LowerHex.
```rust
assert!(format!("{:02x?}", b"Foo\0") == "[46, 6f, 6f, 00]");
assert!(format!("{:02X?}", b"Foo\0") == "[46, 6F, 6F, 00]");
```
RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2226
The new formatting string syntax (`x?` and `X?`) is insta-stable in this PR because I don’t know how to change a built-in proc macro’s behavior based of a feature gate. I can look into adding that, but I also strongly suspect that keeping this feature unstable for a time period would not be useful as possibly no-one would use it during that time.
This PR does not add the new (public) `fmt::Formatter` proposed in the API because:
* There was some skepticism on response to this part of the RFC
* It is not possible to implement as-is without larger changes to `fmt`, because `Formatter` at the moment has no easy way to tell apart for example `Octal` from `Binary`: it only has a function pointer for the relevant `fmt()` method.
If some integer-like type outside of `std` want to implement this behavior, another RFC will likely need to propose a different public API for `Formatter`.
|
|
(This was buggy before https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/46882)
|
|
|
|
It stays in libcore rather than being private in HashMap’s module
because it shares code with the deprecated *stable* `SipHasher` type.
|
|
It is still used by the deprecated *stable* `SipHasher` type.
|
|
|
|
Stabilize the syntax `a..=b` and `..=b`.
|
|
Stabilize std::ops::RangeInclusive and std::ops::RangeInclusiveTo.
|
|
Move ascii::escape_default to libcore
As requested in #46409, the `ascii::escape_default` method has been added to the core library. All I did was copy over the `std::ascii` module file, remove the (redundant) `AsciiExt` trait, and change some of the documentation to match. None of the tests were changed.
I wasn't sure how to handle the annotations. For `EscapeDefault` and `escape_default()`, I changed them to `#[unstable(feature = "core_ascii", issue = "46409")]`. Is that alright? Or should I leave them as they were?
|
|
This can be used for integers within a larger types which implements Debug
(possibly through derive) but not fmt::UpperHex or fmt::LowerHex.
```rust
assert!(format!("{:02x?}", b"Foo\0") == "[46, 6f, 6f, 00]");
assert!(format!("{:02X?}", b"Foo\0") == "[46, 6F, 6F, 00]");
```
RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2226
|
|
|
|
|
