| 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.
|
|
|
|
Sister pull request of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/19288, but
for the other style of block doc comment.
|
|
bounds.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Fixes #19069.
These were never intended not to be feature-gated but this PR is nonetheless a...
[breaking-change]
|
|
optional unboxed closure kind.
|
|
|
|
Fixes #19069.
|
|
`Box<for<'a> Foo<&'a T> + 'a>` can be accepted. Also cleanup the visitor/fold
in general, exposing more callbacks.
|
|
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]
|
|
[breaking-change]
This will break any uses of macros that assumed () being a valid literal.
|
|
|
|
completely.
|
|
These paths also bind anonymous regions (or will, once HRTB is fully working).
Fixes #18423.
|
|
bounds like any other "type parameter".
|
|
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]
|
|
Closes #17792.
|
|
This is *heavily* based on `if let` (#17634) by @jakub- and @kballard
This should close #17687
|
|
|
|
|
|
This change is an implementation of [RFC 69][rfc] which adds a third kind of
global to the language, `const`. This global is most similar to what the old
`static` was, and if you're unsure about what to use then you should use a
`const`.
The semantics of these three kinds of globals are:
* A `const` does not represent a memory location, but only a value. Constants
are translated as rvalues, which means that their values are directly inlined
at usage location (similar to a #define in C/C++). Constant values are, well,
constant, and can not be modified. Any "modification" is actually a
modification to a local value on the stack rather than the actual constant
itself.
Almost all values are allowed inside constants, whether they have interior
mutability or not. There are a few minor restrictions listed in the RFC, but
they should in general not come up too often.
* A `static` now always represents a memory location (unconditionally). Any
references to the same `static` are actually a reference to the same memory
location. Only values whose types ascribe to `Sync` are allowed in a `static`.
This restriction is in place because many threads may access a `static`
concurrently. Lifting this restriction (and allowing unsafe access) is a
future extension not implemented at this time.
* A `static mut` continues to always represent a memory location. All references
to a `static mut` continue to be `unsafe`.
This is a large breaking change, and many programs will need to be updated
accordingly. A summary of the breaking changes is:
* Statics may no longer be used in patterns. Statics now always represent a
memory location, which can sometimes be modified. To fix code, repurpose the
matched-on-`static` to a `const`.
static FOO: uint = 4;
match n {
FOO => { /* ... */ }
_ => { /* ... */ }
}
change this code to:
const FOO: uint = 4;
match n {
FOO => { /* ... */ }
_ => { /* ... */ }
}
* Statics may no longer refer to other statics by value. Due to statics being
able to change at runtime, allowing them to reference one another could
possibly lead to confusing semantics. If you are in this situation, use a
constant initializer instead. Note, however, that statics may reference other
statics by address, however.
* Statics may no longer be used in constant expressions, such as array lengths.
This is due to the same restrictions as listed above. Use a `const` instead.
[breaking-change]
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/246
|
|
|
|
|
|
They will ICE during typechecking if used, because they depend on trait
reform.
This is part of unboxed closures.
|
|
`expr[]`, `expr[expr..]`, `expr[..expr]`,`expr[expr..expr]`
Uses the Slice and SliceMut traits.
Allows ... as well as .. in range patterns.
|
|
The implementation essentially desugars during type collection and AST
type conversion time into the parameter scheme we have now. Only fully
qualified names--e.g. `<T as Foo>::Bar`--are supported.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This allows code to access the fields of tuples and tuple structs:
let x = (1i, 2i);
assert_eq!(x.1, 2);
struct Point(int, int);
let origin = Point(0, 0);
assert_eq!(origin.0, 0);
assert_eq!(origin.1, 0);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[breaking-change]
1. The internal layout for traits has changed from (vtable, data) to (data, vtable). If you were relying on this in unsafe transmutes, you might get some very weird and apparently unrelated errors. You should not be doing this! Prefer not to do this at all, but if you must, you should use raw::TraitObject rather than hardcoding rustc's internal representation into your code.
2. The minimal type of reference-to-vec-literals (e.g., `&[1, 2, 3]`) is now a fixed size vec (e.g., `&[int, ..3]`) where it used to be an unsized vec (e.g., `&[int]`). If you want the unszied type, you must explicitly give the type (e.g., `let x: &[_] = &[1, 2, 3]`). Note in particular where multiple blocks must have the same type (e.g., if and else clauses, vec elements), the compiler will not coerce to the unsized type without a hint. E.g., `[&[1], &[1, 2]]` used to be a valid expression of type '[&[int]]'. It no longer type checks since the first element now has type `&[int, ..1]` and the second has type &[int, ..2]` which are incompatible.
3. The type of blocks (including functions) must be coercible to the expected type (used to be a subtype). Mostly this makes things more flexible and not less (in particular, in the case of coercing function bodies to the return type). However, in some rare cases, this is less flexible. TBH, I'm not exactly sure of the exact effects. I think the change causes us to resolve inferred type variables slightly earlier which might make us slightly more restrictive. Possibly it only affects blocks with unreachable code. E.g., `if ... { fail!(); "Hello" }` used to type check, it no longer does. The fix is to add a semicolon after the string.
|
|
Stop read+write expressions from expanding into two occurences
in the AST. Add a bool to indicate whether an operand in output
position if read+write or not.
Fixes #14936
|
|
These `where` clauses are accepted everywhere generics are currently
accepted and desugar during type collection to the type parameter bounds
we have today.
A new keyword, `where`, has been added. Therefore, this is a breaking
change. Change uses of `where` to other identifiers.
[breaking-change]
|
|
methods.
This paves the way to associated items by introducing an extra level of
abstraction ("impl-or-trait item") between traits/implementations and
methods. This new abstraction is encoded in the metadata and used
throughout the compiler where appropriate.
There are no functional changes; this is purely a refactoring.
|
|
This patch primarily does two things: (1) it prevents lifetimes from
leaking out of unboxed closures; (2) it allows unboxed closure type
notation, call notation, and construction notation to construct closures
matching any of the three traits.
This breaks code that looked like:
let mut f;
{
let x = &5i;
f = |&mut:| *x + 10;
}
Change this code to avoid having a reference escape. For example:
{
let x = &5i;
let mut f; // <-- move here to avoid dangling reference
f = |&mut:| *x + 10;
}
I believe this is enough to consider unboxed closures essentially
implemented. Further issues (for example, higher-rank lifetimes) should
be filed as followups.
Closes #14449.
[breaking-change]
|
|
by-reference upvars.
This partially implements RFC 38. A snapshot will be needed to turn this
on, because stage0 cannot yet parse the keyword.
Part of #12381.
|
|
meaning `'b outlives 'a`. Syntax currently does nothing but is needed for full
fix to #5763. To use this syntax, the issue_5763_bootstrap feature guard is
required.
|
|
|
|
This eliminates the last vestige of the `~` syntax.
Instead of `~self`, write `self: Box<TypeOfSelf>`; instead of `mut
~self`, write `mut self: Box<TypeOfSelf>`, replacing `TypeOfSelf` with
the self-type parameter as specified in the implementation.
Closes #13885.
[breaking-change]
|
|
Implements RFC #168.
|
|
|
|
except where trait objects are involved.
Part of issue #15349, though I'm leaving it open for trait objects.
Cross borrowing for trait objects remains because it is needed until we
have DST.
This will break code like:
fn foo(x: &int) { ... }
let a = box 3i;
foo(a);
Change this code to:
fn foo(x: &int) { ... }
let a = box 3i;
foo(&*a);
[breaking-change]
|
|
This makes two changes to region inference: (1) it allows region
inference to relate early-bound regions; and (2) it allows regions to be
related before variance runs. The former is needed because there is no
relation between the two regions before region substitution happens,
while the latter is needed because type collection has to run before
variance. We assume that, before variance is inferred, that lifetimes
are invariant. This is a conservative overapproximation.
This relates to #13885. This does not remove `~self` from the language
yet, however.
[breaking-change]
|
