Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #71289 (Allow using `Self::` in doc)
- #72375 (Improve E0599 explanation)
- #72385 (Add some teams to prioritization exclude_labels)
- #72395 (Allow rust-highfive to label issues it creates.)
- #72453 (Add flag to open docs: x.py doc --open)
- #72459 (Add core::future::IntoFuture)
- #72461 (Clean up E0600 explanation)
Failed merges:
r? @ghost
Use `once_cell` crate instead of custom data structure
Internally, we use the [`Once`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_data_structures/sync/struct.Once.html) type for shared data that is initialized exactly once and only read from afterwards. `Once` uses a `parking_lot::Mutex` when the parallel compiler is enabled and a `RefCell` when it is not. This PR switches to the [`once_cell`](https://crates.io/crates/once_cell) crate, which also uses a `parking_lot::Mutex` for its `sync` version (because we enable the `parking_lot` feature) but has zero overhead for its `unsync` one.
This PR adds `once_cell` to the list of whitelisted dependencies. I think this is acceptable because it is already used in `rustc_driver`, is owned by a well-known community member (cc @matklad), and has a stable release. cc @rust-lang/compiler
`once_cell` has a slightly more minimal API than `Once`, which allows for initialization to be either optimistic (evaluate the initializer and then synchronize) or pessimistic (synchronize and then evaluate the initializer). `once_cell`'s `get_or_init` is always pessimistic. The optimistic version is only used once in the current `master`.
r? @Mark-Simulacrum
Otherwise inserting it to the `Binder` used by `trait_ref` would cause
problems. This is just to be extra carefult: we aren't going to
start recommending that the user start using HKTs anytime soon.
`mk_obligation_for_def_id` is only correct if the trait and self type do
not have any substitutions. Use a different method,
`mk_trait_obligation_with_new_self_ty` that is more clear about what is
happening.
Add core::future::IntoFuture
This patch reintroduces the `core::future::IntoFuture` trait. However unlike earlier PRs this patch does not integrate it into the `async/.await` lowering since that lead to performance regressions. By introducing the trait separately from the integration, the integration PR can be more narrowly scoped, and people can start trying out the `IntoFuture` trait today. Thanks heaps!
cc/ @rust-lang/wg-async-foundations
## References
- Original PR adding `IntoFuture` https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/65244
- Open issue to re-land `IntoFuture` (assigned to me) https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/67982
- Tracking issue for `IntoFuture` https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/67644
Allow rust-highfive to label issues it creates.
This is my first meaningful PR, I am unsure how to test this code so any pointers would be welcome!
I am about 50% sure it works.
On my machine, an error looks like:
Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 0.29s
Opening doc /git/rust/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/doc/std/index.html
command 'xdg-open (internal)' did not execute successfully; exit code: 4
command stderr:
gio: file:///git/rust/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/doc/std/index.html: Error when getting information for file “/git/rust/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/doc/std/index.html”: No such file or directory
Build completed successfully in 0:00:08
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #71829 (Fix suggestion to borrow in struct)
- #72123 (Stabilize process_set_argv0 feature for Unix)
- #72235 (Clean up E0590 explanation)
- #72345 (Clean up E0593 explanation)
- #72376 ([self-profling] Record the cgu name when doing codegen for a module)
- #72399 (Add fast-path optimization for Ipv4Addr::fmt)
- #72435 (rustllvm: Fix warnings about unused function parameters)
Failed merges:
r? @ghost
