Fix typos in floating-point primitive type docs
Fixes a few typos. Also reflows the text of a couple of paragraphs in the source code to the standard line width to make the source easier to read (will have no effect on the rendered documentation).
Due to a LLVM bug, `f128` math functions link successfully but LLVM
chooses the wrong symbols (`long double` symbols rather than those for
binary128).
Since this is a notable problem that may surprise a number of users, add
a note about it.
Link: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/44744
reference type safety invariant docs: clarification
The old text could have been read as saying that you can call a function if these requirements are upheld, which is definitely not true as they are an underapproximation of the actual safety invariant.
I removed the part about functions relaxing the requirements via their documentation... this seems incoherent with saying that it may actually be unsound to ever temporarily violate the requirement. Furthermore, a function *cannot* just relax this for its return value, that would in general be unsound. And the part about "unsafe code in a safe function may assume these invariants are ensured of arguments passed by the caller" also interacts with relaxing things: clearly, if the invariant has been relaxed, unsafe code cannot rely on it any more. There may be a place to give general guidance on what kinds of function contracts can exist, but the reference type is definitely not the right place to write that down.
I also took a clarification from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121965 that is orthogonal to the rest of that PR.
Cc ```@joshlf``` ```@scottmcm```
Document That `f16` And `f128` Hardware Support is Limited (v2)
This PR is identical to #123892, which was approved and merged but then removed from master by a force-push due to a [CI bug](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/242791-t-infra/topic/ci.20broken.3F).
r? ghost
Original PR description:
---
This adds a small paragraph to the recently added f16 and f128 types explaining that hardware support may be limited, and that performance may suffer as a result of that.
I mainly wrote this because I felt it may be useful to express in some form; as a launchpoint for readers of the documentation if they have issues with performance.
I tried to word the documentation in a way that doesn't create false assumptions (that f16/f128 is too slow to use, for instance), removing the software implementation part could mislead people to thinking that f16/f128 is only available on some platforms, not all, so I believe it is important to keep in.\
"not all *major* platforms" is specifically said so as to not be redundant, because not all platforms implement many things, but the average rustacean is probably going to be using x86_64 or aarch64 derived ISA's, which is who this documentation is targeted towards.
I'm not sure of the best way to word the documentation, or if it should even be added, but I feel like it may be useful to have (potentially in a reworded way, I'm not very confident in the current wording and cannot decide if that is because it is too vague to be useful or too specific to be generally correct).
Co-authored-by: Jubilee <46493976+workingjubilee@users.noreply.github.com>
Update library/core/src/primitive_docs.rs
Remove orphaned doc link and clean up grammar a bit
Update library/core/src/primitive_docs.rs
Co-authored-by: Jubilee <46493976+workingjubilee@users.noreply.github.com>
Update library/core/src/primitive_docs.rs
Rewrite f16 and f128 hw support comments to match PR feedback
I wrote RISC-V allcaps in all cases, and wrote amd64 lowercase in all
cases, im not sure if either is the more correct way for either
platform, thats just how I normally write them, if theres a precedent
elsewhere it should probably be changed to match though.
Update library/core/src/primitive_docs.rs
Co-authored-by: Jubilee <46493976+workingjubilee@users.noreply.github.com>
Update library/core/src/primitive_docs.rs
Co-authored-by: Jubilee <46493976+workingjubilee@users.noreply.github.com>
Update library/core/src/primitive_docs.rs
Update `fn()` trait implementation docs
Fixes#119903
This was FCP'd and approved for the 1.70.0 release, this is just a docs update to match that change.
The two lists in this document describe what traits are implemented on
references when their underlying `T` also implements them. However,
while it is true that `T: Send + Sync` implies `&T: Send` (which is
what the sentence is trying to explain), it is confusing to have `Send`
in the list because `T: Send` is not needed for that. In particular,
the "also require" part may be interpreted as "both `T: Send` and
`T: Sync` are required".
Instead, move `Send` back to where it was before commit 7a477869b7
("Makes docs for references a little less confusing"), i.e. to the `&mut`
list (where no extra nota is needed, i.e. it fits naturally) and move the
`Sync` definition/note to the bottom as something independent.
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
guarantee that char and u32 are ABI-compatible
In https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116894 we added a guarantee that `char` has the same alignment as `u32`, but there is still one axis where these types could differ: function call ABI. So let's nail that down as well: in a function signature, `char` and `u32` are completely equivalent.
This is a new stable guarantee, so it will need t-lang approval.
document ABI compatibility
I don't think we have any central place where we document our ABI compatibility rules, so let's create one. The `fn()` pointer type seems like a good place since ABI questions can only become relevant when invoking a function through a function pointer.
This will likely need T-lang FCP.
