| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
This change makes the compiler no longer infer whether types (structures
and enumerations) implement the `Copy` trait (and thus are implicitly
copyable). Rather, you must implement `Copy` yourself via `impl Copy for
MyType {}`.
A new warning has been added, `missing_copy_implementations`, to warn
you if a non-generic public type has been added that could have
implemented `Copy` but didn't.
For convenience, you may *temporarily* opt out of this behavior by using
`#![feature(opt_out_copy)]`. Note though that this feature gate will never be
accepted and will be removed by the time that 1.0 is released, so you should
transition your code away from using it.
This breaks code like:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
Change this code to:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
impl Copy for Point2D {}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
This is the backwards-incompatible part of #13231.
Part of RFC #3.
[breaking-change]
|
|
|
|
|
|
No semantic changes, no enabling `if let` where it wasn't already enabled.
|
|
Otherwise `--pretty expanded` diverges.
|
|
No semantic changes, no enabling `if let` where it wasn't already enabled.
|
|
This makes it correct (e.g. avoiding null pointers) and safe.
|
|
bounds.
|
|
|
|
appropriately.
|
|
This makes it correct (e.g. avoiding null pointers) and safe.
|
|
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/19077
I would appreciate any guidance on how to write a test for this. I saw some examples in `test/pretty`, but there are different ways to test... With or without `.pp` files, with a `pp-exact` comment, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
[breaking-change]
|
|
r=acrichto
Use the expected type to infer the argument/return types of unboxed closures. Also, in `||` expressions, use the expected type to decide if the result should be a boxed or unboxed closure (and if an unboxed closure, what kind).
This supercedes PR #19089, which was already reviewed by @pcwalton.
|
|
Futureproof Rust for fancier suffixed literals. The Rust compiler tokenises a literal followed immediately (no whitespace) by an identifier as a single token: (for example) the text sequences `"foo"bar`, `1baz` and `1u1024` are now a single token rather than the pairs `"foo"` `bar`, `1` `baz` and `1u` `1024` respectively.
The compiler rejects all such suffixes in the parser, except for the 12 numeric suffixes we have now.
I'm fairly sure this will affect very few programs, since it's not currently legal to have `<literal><identifier>` in a Rust program, except in a macro invocation. Any macro invocation relying on this behaviour can simply separate the two tokens with whitespace: `foo!("bar"baz)` becomes `foo!("bar" baz)`.
This implements [RFC 463](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0463-future-proof-literal-suffixes.md), and so closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/19088.
|
|
optional unboxed closure kind.
|
|
This adds an optional suffix at the end of a literal token:
`"foo"bar`. An actual use of a suffix in a expression (or other literal
that the compiler reads) is rejected in the parser.
This doesn't switch the handling of numbers to this system, and doesn't
outlaw illegal suffixes for them yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
`Box<for<'a> Foo<&'a T> + 'a>` can be accepted. Also cleanup the visitor/fold
in general, exposing more callbacks.
|
|
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.
|
|
`slice_shift_char` splits a `str` into it's leading `char` and the remainder of the `str`. Currently, it returns a `(Option<char>, &str)` such that:
"bar".slice_shift_char() => (Some('b'), "ar")
"ar".slice_shift_char() => (Some('a'), "r")
"r".slice_shift_char() => (Some('r'), "")
"".slice_shift_char() => (None, "")
This is a little odd. Either a `str` can be split into both a head and a tail or it cannot. So the return type should be `Option<(char, &str)>`. With the current behaviour, in the case of the empty string, the `str` returned is meaningless - it is always the empty string.
This PR changes `slice_shift_char` so that:
"bar".slice_shift_char() => Some(('b', "ar"))
"ar".slice_shift_char() => Some(('a', "r"))
"r".slice_shift_char() => Some(('r', ""))
"".slice_shift_char() => None
|
|
This breaks code that referred to variant names in the same namespace as
their enum. Reexport the variants in the old location or alter code to
refer to the new locations:
```
pub enum Foo {
A,
B
}
fn main() {
let a = A;
}
```
=>
```
pub use self::Foo::{A, B};
pub enum Foo {
A,
B
}
fn main() {
let a = A;
}
```
or
```
pub enum Foo {
A,
B
}
fn main() {
let a = Foo::A;
}
```
[breaking-change]
|
|
`slice_shift_char` splits a `str` into it's leading `char` and the remainder
of the `str`. Currently, it returns a `(Option<char>, &str)` such that:
"bar".slice_shift_char() => (Some('b'), "ar")
"ar".slice_shift_char() => (Some('a'), "r")
"r".slice_shift_char() => (Some('r'), "")
"".slice_shift_char() => (None, "")
This is a little odd. Either a `str` can be split into both a head and a
tail or it cannot. So the return type should be `Option<(char, &str)>`.
With the current behaviour, in the case of the empty string, the `str`
returned is meaningless - it is always the empty string.
This commit changes slice_shift_char so that:
"bar".slice_shift_char() => Some(('b', "ar"))
"ar".slice_shift_char() => Some(('a', "r"))
"r".slice_shift_char() => Some(('r', ""))
"".slice_shift_char() => None
[breaking-change]
|
|
[breaking-change]
This will break any uses of macros that assumed () being a valid literal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Closes #14197
Removes the `matchers` nonterminal.
If you're using `$foo:matchers` in a macro, write `$foo:tt` instead.
[breaking-change]
|
|
|
|
completely.
|
|
These paths also bind anonymous regions (or will, once HRTB is fully working).
Fixes #18423.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unicode characters and strings.
Use `\u0080`-`\u00ff` instead. ASCII/byte literals are unaffected.
This PR introduces a new function, `escape_default`, into the ASCII
module. This was necessary for the pretty printer to continue to
function.
RFC #326.
Closes #18062.
[breaking-change]
|
|
|
|
bounds like any other "type parameter".
|
|
|
|
Conflicts:
src/libcollections/vec.rs
|
|
Conflicts:
src/libsyntax/parse/parser.rs
|
|
Conflicts:
src/libcollections/slice.rs
src/libcore/failure.rs
src/libsyntax/parse/token.rs
src/test/debuginfo/basic-types-mut-globals.rs
src/test/debuginfo/simple-struct.rs
src/test/debuginfo/trait-pointers.rs
|
|
This commit enables implementations of IndexMut for a number of collections,
including Vec, RingBuf, SmallIntMap, TrieMap, TreeMap, and HashMap. At the same
time this deprecates the `get_mut` methods on vectors in favor of using the
indexing notation.
cc #18424
|
|
This common representation for delimeters should make pattern matching easier. Having a separate `token::DelimToken` enum also allows us to enforce the invariant that the opening and closing delimiters must be the same in `ast::TtDelimited`, removing the need to ensure matched delimiters when working with token trees.
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
