summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/src/libstd/io/result.rs
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorLines
2015-01-02std: Stabilize the prelude moduleAlex Crichton-1/+1
This commit is an implementation of [RFC 503][rfc] which is a stabilization story for the prelude. Most of the RFC was directly applied, removing reexports. Some reexports are kept around, however: * `range` remains until range syntax has landed to reduce churn. * `Path` and `GenericPath` remain until path reform lands. This is done to prevent many imports of `GenericPath` which will soon be removed. * All `io` traits remain until I/O reform lands so imports can be rewritten all at once to `std::io::prelude::*`. This is a breaking change because many prelude reexports have been removed, and the RFC can be consulted for the exact list of removed reexports, as well as to find the locations of where to import them. [rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0503-prelude-stabilization.md [breaking-change] Closes #20068
2014-12-05Utilize fewer reexportsCorey Farwell-1/+1
In regards to: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/19253#issuecomment-64836729 This commit: * Changes the #deriving code so that it generates code that utilizes fewer reexports (in particur Option::* and Result::*), which is necessary to remove those reexports in the future * Changes other areas of the codebase so that fewer reexports are utilized
2014-11-18implement Writer for Vec<u8>Daniel Micay-3/+3
The trait has an obvious, sensible implementation directly on vectors so the MemWriter wrapper is unnecessary. This will halt the trend towards providing all of the vector methods on MemWriter along with eliminating the noise caused by conversions between the two types. It also provides the useful default Writer methods on Vec<u8>. After the type is removed and code has been migrated, it would make sense to add a new implementation of MemWriter with seeking support. The simple use cases can be covered with vectors alone, and ones with the need for seeks can use a new MemWriter implementation.
2014-11-17Fix fallout from coercion removalNick Cameron-4/+4
2014-10-29Rename fail! to panic!Steve Klabnik-3/+3
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/221 The current terminology of "task failure" often causes problems when writing or speaking about code. You often want to talk about the possibility of an operation that returns a Result "failing", but cannot because of the ambiguity with task failure. Instead, you have to speak of "the failing case" or "when the operation does not succeed" or other circumlocutions. Likewise, we use a "Failure" header in rustdoc to describe when operations may fail the task, but it would often be helpful to separate out a section describing the "Err-producing" case. We have been steadily moving away from task failure and toward Result as an error-handling mechanism, so we should optimize our terminology accordingly: Result-producing functions should be easy to describe. To update your code, rename any call to `fail!` to `panic!` instead. Assuming you have not created your own macro named `panic!`, this will work on UNIX based systems: grep -lZR 'fail!' . | xargs -0 -l sed -i -e 's/fail!/panic!/g' You can of course also do this by hand. [breaking-change]
2014-08-26Use temp vars for implicit coercion to ^[T]Nick Cameron-1/+2
2014-04-06De-~[] Mem{Reader,Writer}Steven Fackler-2/+2
2014-02-28std: Change assert_eq!() to use {} instead of {:?}Alex Crichton-1/+1
Formatting via reflection has been a little questionable for some time now, and it's a little unfortunate that one of the standard macros will silently use reflection when you weren't expecting it. This adds small bits of code bloat to libraries, as well as not always being necessary. In light of this information, this commit switches assert_eq!() to using {} in the error message instead of {:?}. In updating existing code, there were a few error cases that I encountered: * It's impossible to define Show for [T, ..N]. I think DST will alleviate this because we can define Show for [T]. * A few types here and there just needed a #[deriving(Show)] * Type parameters needed a Show bound, I often moved this to `assert!(a == b)` * `Path` doesn't implement `Show`, so assert_eq!() cannot be used on two paths. I don't think this is much of a regression though because {:?} on paths looks awful (it's a byte array). Concretely speaking, this shaved 10K off a 656K binary. Not a lot, but sometime significant for smaller binaries.
2014-02-03std: Fixing all documentationAlex Crichton-3/+3
* Stop referencing io_error * Start changing "Failure" sections to "Error" sections * Update all doc examples to work.
2014-02-03std: Fix tests with io_error usageAlex Crichton-33/+23
2014-02-03std: Remove io::io_errorAlex Crichton-0/+138
* All I/O now returns IoResult<T> = Result<T, IoError> * All formatting traits now return fmt::Result = IoResult<()> * The if_ok!() macro was added to libstd