| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|
The prior documentation did not make it clear this was possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 15 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #52773 (Avoid unnecessary pattern matching against Option and Result)
- #53082 (Fix doc link (again))
- #53094 (Automatically expand section if url id point to one of its component)
- #53106 (atomic ordering docs)
- #53110 (Account for --remap-path-prefix in save-analysis)
- #53116 (NetBSD: fix signedess of char)
- #53179 (Whitelist wasm32 simd128 target feature)
- #53183 (Suggest comma when missing in macro call)
- #53207 (Add individual docs for rotate_{left, right})
- #53211 ([nll] enable feature(nll) on various crates for bootstrap)
- #53214 ([nll] enable feature(nll) on various crates for bootstrap: part 2)
- #53215 (Slightly refactor syntax_ext/format)
- #53217 (inline some short functions)
- #53219 ([nll] enable feature(nll) on various crates for bootstrap: part 3)
- #53222 (A few cleanups for rustc_target)
|
|
|
|
Fixes #53200
|
|
NetBSD: fix signedess of char
|
|
clarify partially initialized Mutex issues
Using a `sys_common::mutex::Mutex` without calling `init` is dangerous, and yet there are some places that do this. I tried to find all of them and add an appropriate comment about reentrancy.
I found two places where (I think) reentrancy can actually occur, and was not able to come up with an argument for why this is okay. Someone who knows `io::lazy` and/or `sys_common::at_exit_imp` should have a careful look at this.
|
|
|
|
state of the mutex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remove references to `StaticMutex` which got removed a while ago
`StaticMutex` got removed two years ago with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/34705, but still got referenced in some comments and even an error explanation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specify reentrancy gurantees of `Once::call_once`
I don't think the docs are clear about what happens in the following code
```rust
static INIT: Once = ONCE_INIT;
INIT.call_once(|| INIT.call_once(|| println!("huh?")));
```
[Playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?gist=15dde1f68a6ede263c7250c36977eade&version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2015)
Let's "specify" the behavior to make it clear that the current behavior (deadlock I think?) is not a strict guarantee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Switch to bootstrapping from 1.29 beta
r? @alexcrichton
|
|
Don't commit thread stack on Windows
On Windows, there is a system level resource limitation called commit limit, which is roughly the sum of physical memory + paging files[1]. `CreateThread` by default commits the stack size[2], which unnecessarily takes such resource from the shared limit.
This PR changes it to only reserve the stack size rather than commit it. Reserved memory would only take the address space of the current process until it's actually accessed.
This should make the behavior on Windows match other platforms, and is also a pretty standard practice on Windows nowadays.
[1] https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/markrussinovich/2008/11/17/pushing-the-limits-of-windows-virtual-memory/
[2] https://docs.microsoft.com/zh-cn/windows/desktop/api/processthreadsapi/nf-processthreadsapi-createthread
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add targets for HermitCore (https://hermitcore.org) to the Rust compiler and port libstd to it.
As a start, the port uses the simplest possible configuration (no jemalloc, abort on panic) and makes use of existing Unix-specific code wherever possible.
It adds targets for x86_64 (current main HermitCore platform) and aarch64 (HermitCore platform under development).
Together with the patches to "liblibc" (https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/pull/1048) and llvm (https://github.com/rust-lang/llvm/pull/122), this enables HermitCore applications to be written in Rust.
|
|
Clarify thread::park semantics
It took me quite some time to realize that the example is not actually racy, so let's clarify it? :-)
|
|
Remove unstable and deprecated APIs
|
|
Document From trait implementations for OsStr, OsString, CString, and CStr
As part of issue #51430 (cc @skade).
The allocation and copy claims should be double-checked.
r? @steveklabnik
|
|
|
|
|
|
|