This commit makes the following functions from `core::str` `const fn`:
- `from_utf8[_mut]` (`feature(const_str_from_utf8)`)
- `from_utf8_unchecked_mut` (`feature(const_str_from_utf8_unchecked_mut)`)
- `Utf8Error::{valid_up_to,error_len}` (`feature(const_str_from_utf8)`)
Permit const panics in stable const contexts in stdlib
Without this change, it is not possible to use `panic!` and similar (including `assert!`) in stable const contexts inside of stdlib. See #89542 for a real-world case that currently fails for this reason. This does _not_ affect any user code.
For example, this snippet currently fails to compile:
```rust
#[stable(feature = "foo", since = "1.0.0")]
#[rustc_const_stable(feature = "foo", since = "1.0.0")]
const fn foo() {
assert!(false);
assert!(false, "foo");
}
```
With the addition of `#[rustc_const_unstable]` to `core::panicking::panic`, the error no longer occurs. This snippet has been added verbatim in this PR as a UI test.
To avoid needing to add `#![feature(core_panic)]` to libcore, the two instances of direct calls to `core::panicking::panic` have been switched to use the `panic!` macro.
I am requesting prioritization because this is holding up other stabilizations such as #89542 (which is otherwise ready to merge and succeeds with this change)
Remove bigint_helper_methods for *signed* types
This PR inspired by `@cuviper's` comment @ https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90541#issuecomment-967309808
These are working well for *unsigned* types, so keep those, but for the the *signed* ones there are a bunch of questions about what the semantics and API should be. For the main "helpers for big integer implementations" use, there's no need for the signed versions anyway. There are plenty of other methods which exist for unsigned types but not signed ones, like `next_power_of_two`, so this isn't unusual.
Fixes#90541
Tracking issue #85532
MIRI says `reverse` is UB, so replace it with something LLVM can vectorize
For small types with padding, the current implementation is UB because it does integer operations on uninit values.
```
error: Undefined Behavior: using uninitialized data, but this operation requires initialized memory
--> /playground/.rustup/toolchains/nightly-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/core/src/num/mod.rs:836:5
|
836 | / uint_impl! { u32, u32, i32, 32, 4294967295, 8, "0x10000b3", "0xb301", "0x12345678",
837 | | "0x78563412", "0x1e6a2c48", "[0x78, 0x56, 0x34, 0x12]", "[0x12, 0x34, 0x56, 0x78]", "", "" }
| |________________________________________________________________________________________________^ using uninitialized data, but this operation requires initialized memory
|
= help: this indicates a bug in the program: it performed an invalid operation, and caused Undefined Behavior
= help: see https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/reference/behavior-considered-undefined.html for further information
= note: inside `core::num::<impl u32>::rotate_left` at /playground/.rustup/toolchains/nightly-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/core/src/num/uint_macros.rs:211:13
= note: inside `core::slice::<impl [Foo]>::reverse` at /playground/.rustup/toolchains/nightly-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/core/src/slice/mod.rs:701:58
```
<https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=340739f22ca5b457e1da6f361768edc6>
But LLVM has gotten smarter since I wrote the previous implementation in 2017, so this PR removes all the manual magic and just writes it in such a way that LLVM will vectorize. This code is much simpler and has very little `unsafe`, and is actually faster to boot!
If you're curious to see the codegen: <https://rust.godbolt.org/z/Pcn13Y9E3>
Before:
```
running 7 tests
test slice::reverse_simd_f64x4 ... bench: 17,940 ns/iter (+/- 481) = 58448 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u128 ... bench: 17,758 ns/iter (+/- 205) = 59048 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u16 ... bench: 158,234 ns/iter (+/- 6,876) = 6626 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u32 ... bench: 62,047 ns/iter (+/- 1,117) = 16899 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u64 ... bench: 31,582 ns/iter (+/- 552) = 33201 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u8 ... bench: 81,253 ns/iter (+/- 1,510) = 12905 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u8x3 ... bench: 270,615 ns/iter (+/- 11,463) = 3874 MB/s
```
After:
```
running 7 tests
test slice::reverse_simd_f64x4 ... bench: 17,731 ns/iter (+/- 306) = 59137 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u128 ... bench: 17,919 ns/iter (+/- 239) = 58517 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u16 ... bench: 43,160 ns/iter (+/- 607) = 24295 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u32 ... bench: 21,065 ns/iter (+/- 371) = 49778 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u64 ... bench: 21,118 ns/iter (+/- 482) = 49653 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u8 ... bench: 76,878 ns/iter (+/- 1,688) = 13639 MB/s
test slice::reverse_u8x3 ... bench: 264,723 ns/iter (+/- 5,544) = 3961 MB/s
```
Those are the existing benches, <14a2fd640e/library/alloc/benches/slice.rs (L322-L346)>
Stabilize `const_raw_ptr_deref` for `*const T`
This stabilizes dereferencing immutable raw pointers in const contexts.
It does not stabilize `*mut T` dereferencing. This is behind the
same feature gate as mutable references.
closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/51911
Re-enable `copy[_nonoverlapping]()` debug-checks
This commit re-enables the debug checks for valid usages of the two functions `copy()` and `copy_nonoverlapping()`. Those checks were commented out in #79684 in order to make the functions const. All that's been left was a FIXME, that could not be resolved until there is was way to only do the checks at runtime.
Since #89247 there is such a way: `const_eval_select()`. This commit uses that new intrinsic in order to either do nothing (at compile time) or to do the old checks (at runtime).
The change itself is rather small: in order to make the checks usable with `const_eval_select`, they are moved into a local function (one for `copy` and one for `copy_nonoverlapping` to keep symmetry).
The change does not break referential transparency, as there is nothing you can do at compile time, which you cannot do on runtime without getting undefined behavior. The CTFE-engine won't allow missuses. The other way round is also fine.
I've refactored the code to use `#[cfg(debug_assertions)]` on the new items. If that is not desired, the second commit can be dropped.
I haven't added any checks, as I currently don't know, how to test this properly.
Closes#90012.
cc `@rust-lang/lang,` `@rust-lang/libs` and `@rust-lang/wg-const-eval` (as those teams are linked in the issue above).
pub use core::simd;
A portable abstraction over SIMD has been a major pursuit in recent years for several programming languages. In Rust, `std::arch` offers explicit SIMD acceleration via compiler intrinsics, but it does so at the cost of having to individually maintain each and every single such API, and is almost completely `unsafe` to use. `core::simd` offers safe abstractions that are resolved to the appropriate SIMD instructions by LLVM during compilation, including scalar instructions if that is all that is available.
`core::simd` is enabled by the `#![portable_simd]` nightly feature tracked in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/86656 and is introduced here by pulling in the https://github.com/rust-lang/portable-simd repository as a subtree. We built the repository out-of-tree to allow faster compilation and a stochastic test suite backed by the proptest crate to verify that different targets, features, and optimizations produce the same result, so that using this library does not introduce any surprises. As these tests are technically non-deterministic, and thus can introduce overly interesting Heisenbugs if included in the rustc CI, they are visible in the commit history of the subtree but do nothing here. Some tests **are** introduced via the documentation, but these use deterministic asserts.
There are multiple unsolved problems with the library at the current moment, including a want for better documentation, technical issues with LLVM scalarizing and lowering to libm, room for improvement for the APIs, and so far I have not added the necessary plumbing for allowing the more experimental or libm-dependent APIs to be used. However, I thought it would be prudent to open this for review in its current condition, as it is both usable and it is likely I am going to learn something else needs to be fixed when bors tries this out.
The major types are
- `core::simd::Simd<T, N>`
- `core::simd::Mask<T, N>`
There is also the `LaneCount` struct, which, together with the SimdElement and SupportedLaneCount traits, limit the implementation's maximum support to vectors we know will actually compile and provide supporting logic for bitmasks. I'm hoping to simplify at least some of these out of the way as the compiler and library evolve.
These are working well for *unsigned* types, for the the signed ones there are a bunch of questions about what the semantics and API should be. And for the main "helpers for big integer implementations" use, there's no need for the signed versions anyway.
And there are plenty of other methods which exist for unsigned types but not signed ones, like `next_power_of_two`, so this isn't unusual.
Fixes 90541
These tests just verify some basic APIs of core::simd function, and
guarantees that attempting to access the wrong things doesn't work.
The majority of tests are stochastic, and so remain upstream, but
a few deterministic tests arrive in the subtree as doc tests.
This enables programmers to use a safe alternative to the current
`extern "platform-intrinsics"` API for writing portable SIMD code.
This is `#![feature(portable_simd)]` as tracked in #86656
Document `unreachable!` custom panic message
The `unreachable!` docs previously did not mention that there was a second form, `unreachable!("message")` that could be used to specify a custom panic message,
The docs now mention this feature in the same wording as currently used for `unimplemented!`:
https://doc.rust-lang.org/core/macro.unimplemented.html#panics
For small types with padding, the current implementation is UB because it does integer operations on uninit values. But LLVM has gotten smarter since I wrote the previous implementation in 2017, so remove all the manual magic and just write it in such a way that LLVM will vectorize. This code is much simpler (albeit nuanced) and has very little `unsafe`, and is actually faster to boot!
The `unreachable!` docs previously did not mention that there was a second
form, `unreachable!("message")` that could be used to specify a custom panic
message,
The docs now mention this in the same style as currently used for `unimplemented!`:
https://doc.rust-lang.org/core/macro.unimplemented.html#panics
This commit goes through and updates various `#[cfg]` as appropriate to
get the wasm64-unknown-unknown target behaving similarly to the
wasm32-unknown-unknown target. Most of this is just updating various
conditions for `target_arch = "wasm32"` to also account for `target_arch
= "wasm64"` where appropriate. This commit also lists `wasm64` as an
allow-listed architecture to not have the `restricted_std` feature
enabled, enabling experimentation with `-Z build-std` externally.
The main goal of this commit is to enable playing around with
`wasm64-unknown-unknown` externally via `-Z build-std` in a way that's
similar to the `wasm32-unknown-unknown` target. These targets are
effectively the same and only differ in their pointer size, but wasm64
is much newer and has much less ecosystem/library support so it'll still
take time to get wasm64 fully-fledged.
Because after PR 86041, the optimizer no longer load-merges at the LLVM IR level, which might be part of the perf loss. (I'll run perf and see if this makes a difference.)
Also I added a codegen test so this hopefully won't regress in future -- it passes on stable and with my change here, but not on the 2021-11-09 nightly.
This commit re-enables the debug checks for valid usages of the two
functions `copy()` and `copy_nonoverlapping()`. Those checks were com-
mented out in #79684 in order to make the functions const. All that's
been left was a FIXME, that could not be resolved until there is was way
to only do the checks at runtime.
Since #89247 there is such a way: `const_eval_select()`. This commit
uses that new intrinsic in order to either do nothing (at compile time)
or to do the old checks (at runtime).
The change itself is rather small: in order to make the checks usable
with `const_eval_select`, they are moved into a local function (one for
`copy` and one for `copy_nonoverlapping` to keep symmetry).
The change does not break referential transparency, as there is nothing
you can do at compile time, which you cannot do on runtime without get-
ting undefined behavior. The CTFE-engine won't allow missuses. The other
way round is also fine.
Add features gates for experimental asm features
This PR splits off parts of `asm!` into separate features because they are not ready for stabilization.
Specifically this adds:
- `asm_const` for `const` operands.
- `asm_sym` for `sym` operands.
- `asm_experimental_arch` for architectures other than x86, x86_64, arm, aarch64 and riscv.
r? `@nagisa`
This stabilizes dereferencing immutable raw pointers in const contexts.
It does not stabilize `*mut T` dereferencing. This is placed behind the
`const_raw_mut_ptr_deref` feature gate.
Add #[must_use] to remaining core functions
I've run out of compelling reasons to group functions together across crates so I'm just going to go module-by-module. This is everything remaining from the `core` crate.
Ignored by clippy for reasons unknown:
```rust
core::alloc::Layout unsafe fn for_value_raw<T: ?Sized>(t: *const T) -> Self;
core::any const fn type_name_of_val<T: ?Sized>(_val: &T) -> &'static str;
```
Ignored by clippy because of `mut`:
```rust
str fn split_at_mut(&mut self, mid: usize) -> (&mut str, &mut str);
```
<del>
Ignored by clippy presumably because a caller might want `f` called for side effects. That seems like a bad usage of `map` to me.
```rust
core::cell::Ref<'b, T> fn map<U: ?Sized, F>(orig: Ref<'b, T>, f: F) -> Ref<'b, T>;
core::cell::Ref<'b, T> fn map_split<U: ?Sized, V: ?Sized, F>(orig: Ref<'b, T>, f: F) -> (Ref<'b, U>, Ref<'b, V>);
```
</del>
Parent issue: #89692
r? ```@joshtriplett```
Add #[must_use] to mem/ptr functions
There's a lot of low-level / unsafe stuff here. Are there legit use cases for ignoring any of these return values?
* No regressions in `./x.py test --stage 1 library/std src/tools/clippy`.
* One regression in `./x.py test --stage 1 src/test/ui`. Fixed.
* I am unable to run `./x.py doc` on my machine so I'll need to wait for the CI to verify doctests pass. I eyeballed all the adjacent tests and they all look okay.
Parent issue: #89692
r? ```@joshtriplett```
Add #[must_use] to expensive computations
The unifying theme for this commit is weak, admittedly. I put together a list of "expensive" functions when I originally proposed this whole effort, but nobody's cared about that criterion. Still, it's a decent way to bite off a not-too-big chunk of work.
Given the grab bag nature of this commit, the messages I used vary quite a bit. I'm open to wording changes.
For some reason clippy flagged four `BTreeSet` methods but didn't say boo about equivalent ones on `HashSet`. I stared at them for a while but I can't figure out the difference so I added the `HashSet` ones in.
```rust
// Flagged by clippy.
alloc::collections::btree_set::BTreeSet<T> fn difference<'a>(&'a self, other: &'a BTreeSet<T>) -> Difference<'a, T>;
alloc::collections::btree_set::BTreeSet<T> fn symmetric_difference<'a>(&'a self, other: &'a BTreeSet<T>) -> SymmetricDifference<'a, T>
alloc::collections::btree_set::BTreeSet<T> fn intersection<'a>(&'a self, other: &'a BTreeSet<T>) -> Intersection<'a, T>;
alloc::collections::btree_set::BTreeSet<T> fn union<'a>(&'a self, other: &'a BTreeSet<T>) -> Union<'a, T>;
// Ignored by clippy, but not by me.
std::collections::HashSet<T, S> fn difference<'a>(&'a self, other: &'a HashSet<T, S>) -> Difference<'a, T, S>;
std::collections::HashSet<T, S> fn symmetric_difference<'a>(&'a self, other: &'a HashSet<T, S>) -> SymmetricDifference<'a, T, S>
std::collections::HashSet<T, S> fn intersection<'a>(&'a self, other: &'a HashSet<T, S>) -> Intersection<'a, T, S>;
std::collections::HashSet<T, S> fn union<'a>(&'a self, other: &'a HashSet<T, S>) -> Union<'a, T, S>;
```
Parent issue: #89692
r? ```@joshtriplett```
track_caller for slice length assertions
`clone_from_slice` was missing `#[track_caller]`, and its assert did not report a useful location.
These are small generic methods, so hopefully track_caller gets inlined into nothingness, but it may be worth running a benchmark on this.
Make `core::slice::from_raw_parts[_mut]` const
Responses to #90012 seem to allow ``@rust-lang/wg-const-eval`` to decide on use of `const_eval_select`, so we can make `core::slice::from_raw_parts[_mut]` const :)
---
This PR marks the following APIs as const:
```rust
// core::slice
pub const unsafe fn from_raw_parts<'a, T>(data: *const T, len: usize) -> &'a [T];
pub const unsafe fn from_raw_parts_mut<'a, T>(data: *mut T, len: usize) -> &'a mut [T];
```
---
Resolves#90011
r? ``@oli-obk``
Make most std::ops traits const on numeric types
This PR makes existing implementations of `std::ops` traits (`Add`, `Sub`, etc) [`impl const`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/67792) where possible.
This affects:
- All numeric primitives (`u*`, `i*`, `f*`)
- `NonZero*`
- `Wrapping`
This is under the `rustc_const_unstable` feature `const_ops`.
I will write tests once I know what can and can't be kept for the final version of this PR.
Since this is my first PR to rustc (and hopefully one of many), please give me feedback on how to better handle the PR process wherever possible. Thanks
[Zulip discussion](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/219381-t-libs/topic/Const.20std.3A.3Aops.20traits.20PR)
Replace some operators in libcore with their short-circuiting equivalents
In libcore there are a few occurrences of bitwise operators used in boolean expressions instead of their short-circuiting equivalents. This makes it harder to perform some kinds of source code analysis over libcore, for example [MC/DC] code coverage (a requirement in safety-critical environments).
This PR aims to remove as many bitwise operators in boolean expressions from libcore as possible, without any performance regression and without other changes. This means not all bitwise operators are removed, only the ones that don't have any difference with their short-circuiting counterparts. This already simplifies achieving MC/DC coverage, and the other functions can be changed in future PRs.
The PR is best reviewed commit-by-commit, and each commit has the resulting assembly in the message.
## Checked integer methods
These methods recently switched to bitwise operators in PRs https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89459 and https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89351. I confirmed bitwise operators are needed in most of the functions, except these two:
* `{integer}::checked_div` ([Godbolt link (nightly)](https://rust.godbolt.org/z/17efh5jPc))
* `{integer}::checked_rem` ([Godbolt link (nightly)](https://rust.godbolt.org/z/85qGWc94K))
`@tspiteri` already mentioned this was the case in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89459#issuecomment-932728384, but opted to also switch those two to bitwise operators for consistency. As that makes MC/DC analysis harder this PR proposes switching those two back to short-circuiting operators.
## `{unsigned_ints}::carrying_add`
[Godbolt link (1.56.0)](https://rust.godbolt.org/z/vG9vx8x48)
In this instance replacing the `|` with `||` produces the exact same assembly when optimizations are enabled, so switching to the short-circuiting operator shouldn't have any impact.
## `{unsigned_ints}::borrowing_sub`
[Godbolt link (1.56.0)](https://rust.godbolt.org/z/asEfKaGE4)
In this instance replacing the `|` with `||` produces the exact same assembly when optimizations are enabled, so switching to the short-circuiting operator shouldn't have any impact.
## String UTF-8 validation
[Godbolt link (1.56.0)](https://rust.godbolt.org/z/a4rEbTvvx)
In this instance replacing the `|` with `||` produces practically the same assembly, with the two operands for the "or" swapped:
```asm
; Old
mov rax, qword ptr [rdi + rdx + 8]
or rax, qword ptr [rdi + rdx]
test rax, r9
je .LBB0_7
; New
mov rax, qword ptr [rdi + rdx]
or rax, qword ptr [rdi + rdx + 8]
test rax, r8
je .LBB0_7
```
[MC/DC]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_condition/decision_coverage
Remove extra lines in examples for `Duration::try_from_secs_*`
None of the other examples have extra lines below the `#![feature(...)]` statements, so I thought it appropriate that these examples shouldn't either.
Clean up special function const checks
Mark them as const and `#[rustc_do_not_const_check]` instead of hard-coding them in const-eval checks.
r? `@oli-obk`
`@rustbot` label A-const-eval T-compiler
Using short-circuit operators makes it easier to perform some kinds of
source code analysis, like MC/DC code coverage (a requirement in
safety-critical environments). The optimized x86 assembly is the same
between the old and new versions:
```
xor eax, eax
test esi, esi
je .LBB0_1
cmp edi, -2147483648
jne .LBB0_4
cmp esi, -1
jne .LBB0_4
ret
.LBB0_1:
ret
.LBB0_4:
mov eax, edi
cdq
idiv esi
mov eax, 1
ret
```
Using short-circuit operators makes it easier to perform some kinds of
source code analysis, like MC/DC code coverage (a requirement in
safety-critical environments). The optimized x86 assembly is the same
between the old and new versions:
```
xor eax, eax
test esi, esi
je .LBB0_1
cmp edi, -2147483648
jne .LBB0_4
cmp esi, -1
jne .LBB0_4
ret
.LBB0_1:
ret
.LBB0_4:
mov eax, edi
cdq
idiv esi
mov edx, eax
mov eax, 1
ret
```
Using short-circuiting operators makes it easier to perform some kinds
of source code analysis, like MC/DC code coverage (a requirement in
safety-critical environments). The optimized x86_64 assembly is
equivalent between the old and new versions.
Old assembly of that condition:
```
mov rax, qword ptr [rdi + rdx + 8]
or rax, qword ptr [rdi + rdx]
test rax, r9
je .LBB0_7
```
New assembly of that condition:
```
mov rax, qword ptr [rdi + rdx]
or rax, qword ptr [rdi + rdx + 8]
test rax, r8
je .LBB0_7
```
Using short-circuiting operators makes it easier to perform some kinds
of source code analysis, like MC/DC code coverage (a requirement in
safety-critical environments). The optimized x86_64 assembly is the same
between the old and new versions:
```
mov eax, edi
add dl, -1
sbb eax, esi
setb dl
ret
```
Using short-circuiting operators makes it easier to perform some kinds
of source code analysis, like MC/DC code coverage (a requirement in
safety-critical environments). The optimized x86_64 assembly is the same
between the old and new versions:
```
mov eax, edi
add dl, -1
adc eax, esi
setb dl
ret
```
Fix and extent ControlFlow `traverse_inorder` example
Fix and extent ControlFlow `traverse_inorder` example
1. The existing example compiles on its own, but any usage fails to be monomorphised and so doesn't compile. Fix that by using Fn trait instead of FnMut.
2. Added an example usage of `traverse_inorder` showing how we can terminate the traversal early.
Fixes#90063
1. The existing example compiles on its own, but any usage fails
to be monomorphised and so doesn't compile. Fix that by using
a mutable reference as an input argument.
2. Added an example usage of `traverse_inorder` showing how we
can terminate the traversal early.
Fixes#90063
Fix and extent ControlFlow `traverse_inorder` example
1. The existing example compiles on its own, but any usage fails to be monomorphised and so doesn't compile. Fix that by using Fn trait instead of FnMut.
2. Added an example usage of `traverse_inorder` showing how we can terminate the traversal early.
Fixes#90063
Make RSplit<T, P>: Clone not require T: Clone
This addresses a TODO comment. The behavior of `#[derive(Clone)]` *does* result in a `T: Clone` requirement. Playground example:
https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=a8b1a9581ff8893baf401d624a53d35b
Add a manual `Clone` implementation, mirroring `Split` and `SplitInclusive`.
`(R)?SplitN(Mut)?` don't have any `Clone` implementations, but I'll leave that for its own pull request.
Implement split_array and split_array_mut
This implements `[T]::split_array::<const N>() -> (&[T; N], &[T])` and `[T; N]::split_array::<const M>() -> (&[T; M], &[T])` and their mutable equivalents. These are another few “missing” array implementations now that const generics are a thing, similar to #74373, #75026, etc. Fixes#74674.
This implements `[T; N]::split_array` returning an array and a slice. Ultimately, this is probably not what we want, we would want the second return value to be an array of length N-M, which will likely be possible with future const generics enhancements. We need to implement the array method now though, to immediately shadow the slice method. This way, when the slice methods get stabilized, calling them on an array will not be automatic through coercion, so we won't have trouble stabilizing the array methods later (cf. into_iter debacle).
An unchecked version of `[T]::split_array` could also be added as in #76014. This would not be needed for `[T; N]::split_array` as that can be compile-time checked. Edit: actually, since split_at_unchecked is internal-only it could be changed to be split_array-only.
My change to use `Type::def_id()` (formerly `Type::def_id_full()`) in
more places caused some docs to show up that used to be missed by
rustdoc. Those docs contained unescaped square brackets, which triggered
linkcheck errors. This commit escapes the square brackets and adds this
particular instance to the linkcheck exception list.
Stabilize feature `saturating_div` for rust 1.58.0
The tracking issue is #89381
This seems like a reasonable simple change(?). The feature `saturating_div` was added as part of the ongoing effort to implement a `Saturating` integer type (see #87921). The implementation has been discussed [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87921#issuecomment-899357720) and [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87921#discussion_r691888556). It extends the list of saturating operations on integer types (like `saturating_add`, `saturating_sub`, `saturating_mul`, ...) by the function `fn saturating_div(self, rhs: Self) -> Self`.
The stabilization of the feature `saturating_int_impl` (for the `Saturating` type) needs to have this stabilized first.
Closes#89381
This addresses a TODO comment. The behavior of #[derive(Clone)]
*does* result in a T: Clone requirement.
Add a manual Clone implementation, matching Split and SplitInclusive.
Make more `From` impls `const` (libcore)
Adding `const` to `From` implementations in the core. `rustc_const_unstable` attribute is not added to unstable implementations.
Tracking issue: #88674
<details>
<summary>Done</summary><div>
- `T` from `T`
- `T` from `!`
- `Option<T>` from `T`
- `Option<&T>` from `&Option<T>`
- `Option<&mut T>` from `&mut Option<T>`
- `Cell<T>` from `T`
- `RefCell<T>` from `T`
- `UnsafeCell<T>` from `T`
- `OnceCell<T>` from `T`
- `Poll<T>` from `T`
- `u32` from `char`
- `u64` from `char`
- `u128` from `char`
- `char` from `u8`
- `AtomicBool` from `bool`
- `AtomicPtr<T>` from `*mut T`
- `AtomicI(bits)` from `i(bits)`
- `AtomicU(bits)` from `u(bits)`
- `i(bits)` from `NonZeroI(bits)`
- `u(bits)` from `NonZeroU(bits)`
- `NonNull<T>` from `Unique<T>`
- `NonNull<T>` from `&T`
- `NonNull<T>` from `&mut T`
- `Unique<T>` from `&mut T`
- `Infallible` from `!`
- `TryIntError` from `!`
- `TryIntError` from `Infallible`
- `TryFromSliceError` from `Infallible`
- `FromResidual for Option<T>`
</div></details>
<details>
<summary>Remaining</summary><dev>
- `NonZero` from `NonZero`
These can't be made const at this time because these use Into::into.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/library/core/src/convert/num.rs#L393
- `std`, `alloc`
There may still be many implementations that can be made `const`.
</div></details>
remove unnecessary bound on Zip specialization impl
I originally added this bound in an attempt to make the specialization
sound for owning iterators but it was never correct here and the correct
and [already implemented](497ee321af/library/alloc/src/vec/into_iter.rs (L220-L232)) solution is is to place it on the IntoIter
implementation.
Automatic exponential formatting in Debug
Context: See [this comment from the libs team](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2729#issuecomment-853454204)
---
Makes `"{:?}"` switch to exponential for floats based on magnitude. The libs team suggested exploring this idea in the discussion thread for RFC rust-lang/rfcs#2729. (**note:** this is **not** an implementation of the RFC; it is an implementation of one of the alternatives)
Thresholds chosen were 1e-4 and 1e16. Justification described [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2729#issuecomment-864482954).
**This will require a crater run.**
---
As mentioned in the commit message of 8731d4dfb4, this behavior will not apply when a precision is supplied, because I wanted to preserve the following existing and useful behavior of `{:.PREC?}` (which recursively applies `{:.PREC}` to floats in a struct):
```rust
assert_eq!(
format!("{:.2?}", [100.0, 0.000004]),
"[100.00, 0.00]",
)
```
I looked around and am not sure where there are any tests that actually use this in the test suite, though?
All things considered, I'm surprised that this change did not seem to break even a single existing test in `x.py test --stage 2`. (even when I tried a smaller threshold of 1e6)
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #89766 (RustWrapper: adapt for an LLVM API change)
- #89867 (Fix macro_rules! duplication when reexported in the same module)
- #89941 (removing TLS support in x86_64-unknown-none-hermitkernel)
- #89956 (Suggest a case insensitive match name regardless of levenshtein distance)
- #89988 (Do not promote values with const drop that need to be dropped)
- #89997 (Add test for issue #84957 - `str.as_bytes()` in a `const` expression)
- #90002 (⬆️ rust-analyzer)
- #90034 (Tiny tweak to Iterator::unzip() doc comment example.)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Revert "Auto merge of #89709 - clemenswasser:apply_clippy_suggestions…
…_2, r=petrochenkov"
The PR had some unforseen perf regressions that are not as easy to find.
Revert the PR for now.
This reverts commit 6ae8912a3e, reversing
changes made to 86d6d2b738.
It's easier to figure out what it's doing and which output
elements map to which input ones if the matrix we are dealing
with is rectangular 2x3 rather than square 2x2.
