I took the definition of what a total order is from the Ord trait
docs. I specifically put "elements of the slice" because if you
have a slice of f64s, but know none are NaN, then sorting by
partial ord is total in this case. I'm not sure if I should give
such an example in the docs or not.
This commit fixes a buffer overflow issue in the standard library
discovered by Scott McMurray where if a large number was passed to
`str::repeat` it may cause and out of bounds write to the buffer of a `Vec`.
This bug was accidentally introduced in #48657 when optimizing the
`str::repeat` function. The bug affects stable Rust releases 1.26.0 to
1.29.0. We plan on backporting this fix to create a 1.29.1 release, and
the 1.30.0 release onwards will include this fix.
The fix in this commit is to introduce a deterministic panic in the case of
capacity overflow. When repeating a slice where the resulting length is larger
than the address space, there’s no way it can succeed anyway!
The standard library and surrounding libraries were briefly checked to see if
there were othere instances of preallocating a vector with a calculation that
may overflow. No instances of this bug (out of bounds write due to a calculation
overflow) were found at this time.
Note that this commit is the first steps towards fixing this issue,
we'll be making a formal post to the Rust security list once these
commits have been merged.
for both Vec<T> and String
- eliminates the boolean first flag in fn join()
for String only
- eliminates repeated bounds checks in join(), concat()
- adds fast paths for small string separators up to a len of 4 bytes
Add slice::ExactChunks and ::ExactChunksMut iterators
These guarantee that always the requested slice size will be returned
and any leftoever elements at the end will be ignored. It allows llvm to
get rid of bounds checks in the code using the iterator.
This is inspired by the same iterators provided by ndarray.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47115
I'll add unit tests for all this if the general idea and behaviour makes sense for everybody.
Also see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47115#issuecomment-354715511 for an example what this improves.
These guarantee that always the requested slice size will be returned
and any leftoever elements at the end will be ignored. It allows llvm to
get rid of bounds checks in the code using the iterator.
This is inspired by the same iterators provided by ndarray.
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47115
type error method suggestions use whitelisted identity-like conversions
Previously, on a type mismatch (and if this wasn't preëmpted by a
higher-priority suggestion), we would look for argumentless methods
returning the expected type, and list them in a `help` note. This had two
major shortcomings: firstly, a lot of the suggestions didn't really make
sense (if you used a &str where a String was expected,
`.to_ascii_uppercase()` is probably not the solution you were hoping
for). Secondly, we weren't generating suggestions from the most useful
traits! We address the first problem with an internal
`#[rustc_conversion_suggestion]` attribute meant to mark methods that keep
the "same value" in the relevant sense, just converting the type. We
address the second problem by making `FnCtxt.probe_for_return_type` pass
the `ProbeScope::AllTraits` to `probe_op`: this would seem to be safe
because grep reveals no other callers of `probe_for_return_type`.
Also, structured suggestions are pretty and good for RLS and friends.
Unfortunately, the trait probing is still not all one would hope for: at a
minimum, we don't know how to rule out `into()` in cases where it wouldn't
actually work, and we don't know how to rule in `.to_owned()` where it
would. Issues #46459 and #46460 have been filed and are ref'd in a FIXME.
This is hoped to resolve#42929, #44672, and #45777.
Deprecate [T]::rotate in favor of [T]::rotate_{left,right}.
Background
==========
Slices currently have an **unstable** [`rotate`] method which rotates
elements in the slice to the _left_ N positions. [Here][tracking] is the
tracking issue for this unstable feature.
```rust
let mut a = ['a', 'b' ,'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
a.rotate(2);
assert_eq!(a, ['c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'a', 'b']);
```
Proposal
========
Deprecate the [`rotate`] method and introduce `rotate_left` and
`rotate_right` methods.
```rust
let mut a = ['a', 'b' ,'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
a.rotate_left(2);
assert_eq!(a, ['c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'a', 'b']);
```
```rust
let mut a = ['a', 'b' ,'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
a.rotate_right(2);
assert_eq!(a, ['e', 'f', 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd']);
```
Justification
=============
I used this method today for my first time and (probably because I’m a
naive westerner who reads LTR) was surprised when the docs mentioned that
elements get rotated in a left-ward direction. I was in a situation
where I needed to shift elements in a right-ward direction and had to
context switch from the main problem I was working on and think how much
to rotate left in order to accomplish the right-ward rotation I needed.
Ruby’s `Array.rotate` shifts left-ward, Python’s `deque.rotate` shifts
right-ward. Both of their implementations allow passing negative numbers
to shift in the opposite direction respectively. The current `rotate`
implementation takes an unsigned integer argument which doesn't allow
the negative number behavior.
Introducing `rotate_left` and `rotate_right` would:
- remove ambiguity about direction (alleviating need to read docs 😉)
- make it easier for people who need to rotate right
[`rotate`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.slice.html#method.rotate
[tracking]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41891
Previously, on a type mismatch (and if this wasn't preëmpted by a
higher-priority suggestion), we would look for argumentless methods
returning the expected type, and list them in a `help` note.
This had two major shortcomings. Firstly, a lot of the suggestions didn't
really make sense (if you used a &str where a String was expected,
`.to_ascii_uppercase()` is probably not the solution you were hoping
for). Secondly, we weren't generating suggestions from the most useful
traits!
We address the first problem with an internal
`#[rustc_conversion_suggestion]` attribute meant to mark methods that keep
the "same value" in the relevant sense, just converting the type. We
address the second problem by making `FnCtxt.probe_for_return_type` pass
the `ProbeScope::AllTraits` to `probe_op`: this would seem to be safe
because grep reveals no other callers of `probe_for_return_type`.
Also, structured suggestions are preferred (because they're pretty, but
also for RLS and friends).
Also also, we make the E0055 autoderef recursion limit error use the
one-time-diagnostics set, because we can potentially hit the limit a lot
during probing. (Without this,
test/ui/did_you_mean/recursion_limit_deref.rs would report "aborting due to
51 errors").
Unfortunately, the trait probing is still not all one would hope for: at a
minimum, we don't know how to rule out `into()` in cases where it wouldn't
actually work, and we don't know how to rule in `.to_owned()` where it
would. Issues #46459 and #46460 have been filed and are ref'd in a FIXME.
This is hoped to resolve#42929, #44672, and #45777.
Mention SliceConcatExt's stability in its docs
Just saw someone in IRC mention there being no stable way to join string slices! It isn't entirely clear from the rust documentation that `SliceConcatExt` is usable. While this is mentioned in https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/prelude/, the trait has nothing to indicate that it's currently usable if found via a documentation search.
The wording on this could probably be improved, but I'm hoping its better than nothing.
SliceConcatExt's status as an unstable trait with stable methods is
documented in the compiler error for using it, and in
https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/prelude/, but it is not mentioned in the
trait itself.
Mentioning the methods can be used in stable rust today should help
users who are looking for a `join` method while working on stable rust.
Background
==========
Slices currently have an unstable [`rotate`] method which rotates
elements in the slice to the _left_ N positions. [Here][tracking] is the
tracking issue for this unstable feature.
```rust
let mut a = ['a', 'b' ,'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
a.rotate(2);
assert_eq!(a, ['c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'a', 'b']);
```
Proposal
========
Deprecate the [`rotate`] method and introduce `rotate_left` and
`rotate_right` methods.
```rust
let mut a = ['a', 'b' ,'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
a.rotate_left(2);
assert_eq!(a, ['c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'a', 'b']);
```
```rust
let mut a = ['a', 'b' ,'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
a.rotate_right(2);
assert_eq!(a, ['e', 'f', 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd']);
```
Justification
=============
I used this method today for my first time and (probably because I’m a
naive westerner who reads LTR) was surprised when the docs mentioned that
elements get rotated in a left-ward direction. I was in a situation
where I needed to shift elements in a right-ward direction and had to
context switch from the main problem I was working on and think how much
to rotate left in order to accomplish the right-ward rotation I needed.
Ruby’s `Array.rotate` shifts left-ward, Python’s `deque.rotate` shifts
right-ward. Both of their implementations allow passing negative numbers
to shift in the opposite direction respectively.
Introducing `rotate_left` and `rotate_right` would:
- remove ambiguity about direction (alleviating need to read docs 😉)
- make it easier for people who need to rotate right
[`rotate`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.slice.html#method.rotate
[tracking]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41891
The ascii_methods_on_intrinsics feature stabilization
didn't land in time for 1.21.0. Update the annotation
so the documentation is correct about when these
methods became available.
