| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
This is *heavily* based on `if let` (#17634) by @jakub- and @kballard
This should close #17687
|
|
All deprecation warnings have been converted to errors. This includes
the warning for multiple cfgs on one item. We'll leave that as an error
for some period of time to ensure that all uses are updated before the
behavior changes from "or" to "and".
|
|
I did not put the crate name in the error note, if that's necessary I'll look into it.
Closes #17709
|
|
A few catch-all blocks ended up not having this case for constants.
Closes #17925
|
|
All deprecation warnings have been converted to errors. This includes
the warning for multiple cfgs on one item. We'll leave that as an error
for some period of time to ensure that all uses are updated before the
behavior changes from "or" to "and".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
Closes #17718
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/246
|
|
|
|
This reverts commit 2288f332301b9e22db2890df256322650a7f3445.
|
|
Instead of returning &'static [u8], an invocation of `bytes!()` now returns
`&'static [u8, ..N]` where `N` is the length of the byte vector. This should
functionally be the same, but there are some cases where an explicit cast may be
needed, so this is a:
[breaking-change]
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
0.12.0 release
|
|
Closes #17862
|
|
|
|
|
|
The previous fix introduced in 75d49c8203405ab0af7a2b8b8698af02868fdbc2 neglected to parse outer attributes as described in #17782.
|
|
|
|
options..." error in macros, which often occurs when trying to match parts of Rust syntax.
For example, this matcher: `fn $name:ident( $($param:ident : $pty:ty),* )` would fail when parsing `fn foo()`, because macro parser wouldn't realize that an ident cannot start with `)`.
This resolves #5902, and at least partially mitigates #9364 and #3232.
|
|
|
|
[breaking-change]
If you are using slicing syntax you will need to add #![feature(slicing_syntax)] to your crate.
|
|
|
|
Fixes #17782.
|
|
Closes #17773.
|
|
|
|
Closes #14772.
|
|
Closes #17709
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Closes #15914.
|
|
|
|
@steveklabnik, are you interested in looking this over?
|
|
This rewrites them to the current `ItemStatic` production of the compiler, but I
want to get this into a snapshot. It will be illegal to use a `static` in a
pattern of a `match` statement, so all those current uses will need to be
rewritten to `const` once it's implemented. This requires that the stage0
snapshot is able to parse `const`.
cc #17718
|
|
Conflicts:
src/libcollections/lib.rs
src/libcore/lib.rs
src/librustdoc/lib.rs
src/librustrt/lib.rs
src/libserialize/lib.rs
src/libstd/lib.rs
src/test/run-pass/issue-8898.rs
|
|
This reverts commit 40b9f5ded50ac4ce8c9323921ec556ad611af6b7.
|
|
This reverts commit 95cfc35607ccf5f02f02de56a35a9ef50fa23a82.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[breaking-change]
If you are using slicing syntax you will need to add #![feature(slicing_syntax)] to your crate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a patch for #17628, thanks to @kmcallister for your helpful hints!
|
|
|
|
Closes #17490
|
