Don't derive `PartialEq::ne`.
Currently we skip deriving `PartialEq::ne` for C-like (fieldless) enums
and empty structs, thus reyling on the default `ne`. This behaviour is
unnecessarily conservative, because the `PartialEq` docs say this:
> Implementations must ensure that eq and ne are consistent with each other:
>
> `a != b` if and only if `!(a == b)` (ensured by the default
> implementation).
This means that the default implementation (`!(a == b)`) is always good
enough. So this commit changes things such that `ne` is never derived.
The motivation for this change is that not deriving `ne` reduces compile
times and binary sizes.
Observable behaviour may change if a user has defined a type `A` with an
inconsistent `PartialEq` and then defines a type `B` that contains an
`A` and also derives `PartialEq`. Such code is already buggy and
preserving bug-for-bug compatibility isn't necessary.
Two side-effects of the change:
- There is only one error message produced for types where `PartialEq`
cannot be derived, instead of two.
- For coverage reports, some warnings about generated `ne` methods not
being executed have disappeared.
Both side-effects seem fine, and possibly preferable.
Currently we skip deriving `PartialEq::ne` for C-like (fieldless) enums
and empty structs, thus reyling on the default `ne`. This behaviour is
unnecessarily conservative, because the `PartialEq` docs say this:
> Implementations must ensure that eq and ne are consistent with each other:
>
> `a != b` if and only if `!(a == b)` (ensured by the default
> implementation).
This means that the default implementation (`!(a == b)`) is always good
enough. So this commit changes things such that `ne` is never derived.
The motivation for this change is that not deriving `ne` reduces compile
times and binary sizes.
Observable behaviour may change if a user has defined a type `A` with an
inconsistent `PartialEq` and then defines a type `B` that contains an
`A` and also derives `PartialEq`. Such code is already buggy and
preserving bug-for-bug compatibility isn't necessary.
Two side-effects of the change:
- There is only one error message produced for types where `PartialEq`
cannot be derived, instead of two.
- For coverage reports, some warnings about generated `ne` methods not
being executed have disappeared.
Both side-effects seem fine, and possibly preferable.
The current code will not results bug, but it difficult to understand. These code result to call &f32::partial_cmp(), and the performance will be lower than the changed code. I'm not sure why the current code don't use (*self) (*other), if you have some idea, please let me know.
This makes `PartialOrd` consistent with the other three traits in this
module, which all include links to their respective mathematical concepts
on Wikipedia.
For some reason, I always forget which variants are smaller and which
are larger when you derive PartialOrd on an enum. And the wording in the
current docs is not entirely clear to me.
So, I often end up making a small enum, deriving PartialOrd on it, and
then writing a `#[test]` with an assert that the top one is smaller than
the bottom one (or the other way around) to figure out which way the
deriving goes.
So then I figured, it would be great if the standard library docs just
had that example, so if I keep forgetting, at least I can figure it out
quickly by looking at std's docs.
using allow_internal_unstable (as recommended)
Fixes: #84836
```shell
$ ./build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage1/bin/rustc src/test/run-make-fulldeps/coverage/no_cov_crate.rs
error[E0554]: `#![feature]` may not be used on the dev release channel
--> src/test/run-make-fulldeps/coverage/no_cov_crate.rs:2:1
|
2 | #![feature(no_coverage)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0554`.
```
The Eq trait has a special hidden function. MIR `InstrumentCoverage`
would add this function to the coverage map, but it is never called, so
the `Eq` trait would always appear uncovered.
Fixes: #83601
The fix required creating a new function attribute `no_coverage` to mark
functions that should be ignored by `InstrumentCoverage` and the
coverage `mapgen` (during codegen).
While testing, I also noticed two other issues:
* spanview debug file output ICEd on a function with no body. The
workaround for this is included in this PR.
* `assert_*!()` macro coverage can appear covered if followed by another
`assert_*!()` macro. Normally they appear uncovered. I submitted a new
Issue #84561, and added a coverage test to demonstrate this issue.
