rustdoc: Resolve doc links referring to `macro_rules` items
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81633
UPD: the fallback to considering *all* `macro_rules` in the crate for unresolved names is not removed in this PR, it will be removed separately and will be run through crater.
Using an obviously-placeholder syntax. An RFC would still be needed before this could have any chance at stabilization, and it might be removed at any point.
But I'd really like to have it in nightly at least to ensure it works well with try_trait_v2, especially as we refactor the traits.
Fix some confusing wording and improve slice-search-related docs
This adds more links between `contains` and `binary_search` because I do think they have some relevant connections. If your (big) slice happens to be sorted and you know it, surely you should be using `[3; 100].binary_search(&5).is_ok()` over `[3; 100].contains(&5)`?
This also fixes the confusing "searches this sorted X" wording which just sounds really weird because it doesn't know whether it's actually sorted. It should be but it may not be. The new wording should make it clearer that you will probably want to sort it and in the same sentence it also mentions the related function `contains`.
Similarly, this mentions `binary_search` on `contains`' docs.
This also fixes some other minor stuff and inconsistencies.
Unstably constify `impl<I: Iterator> IntoIterator for I`
This constifies the default `IntoIterator` implementation under the `const_intoiterator_identity` feature.
Tracking Issue: #90603
No "weird" floats in const fn {from,to}_bits
I suspect this code is subtly incorrect and that we don't even e.g. use x87-style floats in CTFE, so I don't have to guard against that case. A future PR will be hopefully removing them from concern entirely, anyways. But at the moment I wanted to get this rolling because small questions like that one seem best answered by review.
r? `@oli-obk`
cc `@eddyb` `@thomcc`
Add slice::remainder
This adds a remainder function to the Slice iterator, so that a caller can access unused
elements if iteration stops.
Addresses #91733
Make some `usize`-typed masks definitions agnostic to the size of `usize`
Some masks where defined as
```rust
const NONASCII_MASK: usize = 0x80808080_80808080u64 as usize;
```
where it was assumed that `usize` is never wider than 64, which is currently true.
To make those constants valid in a hypothetical 128-bit target, these constants have been redefined in an `usize`-width-agnostic way
```rust
const NONASCII_MASK: usize = usize::from_ne_bytes([0x80; size_of::<usize>()]);
```
There are already some cases where Rust anticipates the possibility of supporting 128-bit targets, such as not implementing `From<usize>` for `u64`.
docs: add link from zip to unzip
The docs for `Iterator::unzip` explain that it is kind of an inverse operation to `Iterator::zip` and guide the reader to the `zip` docs, but the `zip` docs don't let the user know that they can undo the `zip` operation with `unzip`. This change modifies the docs to help the user find `unzip`.
Create (unstable) 2024 edition
[On Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/Deprecating.20macro.20scoping.20shenanigans/near/272860652), there was a small aside regarding creating the 2024 edition now as opposed to later. There was a reasonable amount of support and no stated opposition.
This change creates the 2024 edition in the compiler and creates a prelude for the 2024 edition. There is no current difference between the 2021 and 2024 editions. Cargo and other tools will need to be updated separately, as it's not in the same repository. This change permits the vast majority of work towards the next edition to proceed _now_ instead of waiting until 2024.
For sanity purposes, I've merged the "hello" UI tests into a single file with multiple revisions. Otherwise we'd end up with a file per edition, despite them being essentially identical.
````@rustbot```` label +T-lang +S-waiting-on-review
Not sure on the relevant team, to be honest.
Stabilize `derive_default_enum`
This stabilizes `#![feature(derive_default_enum)]`, as proposed in [RFC 3107](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3107) and tracked in #87517. In short, it permits you to `#[derive(Default)]` on `enum`s, indicating what the default should be by placing a `#[default]` attribute on the desired variant (which must be a unit variant in the interest of forward compatibility).
```````@rustbot``````` label +S-waiting-on-review +T-lang
Some masks where defined as
```rust
const NONASCII_MASK: usize = 0x80808080_80808080u64 as usize;
```
where it was assumed that `usize` is never wider than 64, which is currently true.
To make those constants valid in a hypothetical 128-bit target, these constants have been redefined in an `usize`-width-agnostic way
```rust
const NONASCII_MASK: usize = usize::from_ne_bytes([0x80; size_of::<usize>()]);
```
There are already some cases where Rust anticipates the possibility of supporting 128-bit targets, such as not implementing `From<usize>` for `u64`.
The docs for `Iterator::unzip` explain that it is kind of an inverse operation to `Iterator::zip` and guide the reader to the `zip` docs, but the `zip` docs don't let the user know that they can undo the `zip` operation with `unzip`. This change modifies the docs to help the user find `unzip`.
Implement tuples using recursion
Because it is c00l3r™, requires less repetition and can be used as a reference for external people.
This change is non-essential and I am not sure about potential performance impacts so feel free to close this PR if desired.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Faster parsing for lower numbers for radix up to 16 (cont.)
( Continuation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83371 )
With LingMan's change I think this is potentially ready.
Clarify str::from_utf8_unchecked's invariants
Specifically, make it clear that it is immediately UB to pass ill-formed UTF-8 into the function. The previous wording left space to interpret that the UB only occurred when calling another function, which "assumes that `&str`s are valid UTF-8."
This does not change whether str being UTF-8 is a safety or a validity invariant. (As per previous discussion, it is a safety invariant, not a validity invariant.) It just makes it clear that valid UTF-8 is a precondition of str::from_utf8_unchecked, and that emitting an Abstract Machine fault (e.g. UB or a sanitizer error) on invalid UTF-8 is a valid thing to do.
If user code wants to create an unsafe `&str` pointing to ill-formed UTF-8, it must be done via transmutes. Also, just, don't.
Zulip discussion: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-lang.2Fwg-unsafe-code-guidelines/topic/str.3A.3Afrom_utf8_unchecked.20Safety.20requirement
