Add `AsyncFn` family of traits
I'm proposing to add a new family of `async`hronous `Fn`-like traits to the standard library for experimentation purposes.
## Why do we need new traits?
On the user side, it is useful to be able to express `AsyncFn` trait bounds natively via the parenthesized sugar syntax, i.e. `x: impl AsyncFn(&str) -> String` when experimenting with async-closure code.
This also does not preclude `AsyncFn` becoming something else like a trait alias if a more fundamental desugaring (which can take many[^1] different[^2] forms) comes around. I think we should be able to play around with `AsyncFn` well before that, though.
I'm also not proposing stabilization of these trait names any time soon (we may even want to instead express them via new syntax, like `async Fn() -> ..`), but I also don't think we need to introduce an obtuse bikeshedding name, since `AsyncFn` just makes sense.
## The lending problem: why not add a more fundamental primitive of `LendingFn`/`LendingFnMut`?
Firstly, for `async` closures to be as flexible as possible, they must be allowed to return futures which borrow from the async closure's captures. This can be done by introducing `LendingFn`/`LendingFnMut` traits, or (equivalently) by adding a new generic associated type to `FnMut` which allows the return type to capture lifetimes from the `&mut self` argument of the trait. This was proposed in one of [Niko's blog posts](https://smallcultfollowing.com/babysteps/blog/2023/05/09/giving-lending-and-async-closures/).
Upon further experimentation, for the purposes of closure type- and borrow-checking, I've come to the conclusion that it's significantly harder to teach the compiler how to handle *general* lending closures which may borrow from their captures. This is, because unlike `Fn`/`FnMut`, the `LendingFn`/`LendingFnMut` traits don't form a simple "inheritance" hierarchy whose top trait is `FnOnce`.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
Fn
FnMut
FnOnce
LendingFn
LendingFnMut
Fn -- isa --> FnMut
FnMut -- isa --> FnOnce
LendingFn -- isa --> LendingFnMut
Fn -- isa --> LendingFn
FnMut -- isa --> LendingFnMut
```
For example:
```
fn main() {
let s = String::from("hello, world");
let f = move || &s;
let x = f(); // This borrows `f` for some lifetime `'1` and returns `&'1 String`.
```
That trait hierarchy means that in general for "lending" closures, like `f` above, there's not really a meaningful return type for `<typeof(f) as FnOnce>::Output` -- it can't return `&'static str`, for example.
### Special-casing this problem:
By splitting out these traits manually, and making sure that each trait has its own associated future type, we side-step the issue of having to answer the questions of a general `LendingFn`/`LendingFnMut` implementation, since the compiler knows how to generate built-in implementations for first-class constructs like async closures, including the required future types for the (by-move) `AsyncFnOnce` and (by-ref) `AsyncFnMut`/`AsyncFn` trait implementations.
[^1]: For example, with trait transformers, we may eventually be able to write: `trait AsyncFn = async Fn;`
[^2]: For example, via the introduction of a more fundamental "`LendingFn`" trait, plus a [special desugaring with augmented trait aliases](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/Lending.20closures.20and.20Fn*.28.29.20-.3E.20impl.20Trait/near/408471480).
Replacement of #114390: Add new intrinsic `is_var_statically_known` and optimize pow for powers of two
This adds a new intrinsic `is_val_statically_known` that lowers to [``@llvm.is.constant.*`](https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#llvm-is-constant-intrinsic).` It also applies the intrinsic in the int_pow methods to recognize and optimize the idiom `2isize.pow(x)`. See #114390 for more discussion.
While I have extended the scope of the power of two optimization from #114390, I haven't added any new uses for the intrinsic. That can be done in later pull requests.
Note: When testing or using the library, be sure to use `--stage 1` or higher. Otherwise, the intrinsic will be a noop and the doctests will be skipped. If you are trying out edits, you may be interested in [`--keep-stage 0`](https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/building/suggested.html#faster-builds-with---keep-stage).
Fixes#47234Resolves#114390
`@Centri3`
Add `NonZero*::count_ones`
This PR adds the following APIs to the standard library:
```rust
impl NonZero* {
pub const fn count_ones(self) -> NonZeroU32;
}
```
This is potentially interesting, given that `count_ones` can't ever return 0.
r? libs-api
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #112806 (Small code improvements in `collect_intra_doc_links.rs`)
- #119766 (Split tait and impl trait in assoc items logic)
- #120139 (Do not normalize closure signature when building `FnOnce` shim)
- #120160 (Manually implement derived `NonZero` traits.)
- #120171 (Fix assume and assert in jump threading)
- #120183 (Add `#[coverage(off)]` to closures introduced by `#[test]` and `#[bench]`)
- #120195 (add several resolution test cases)
- #120259 (Split Diagnostics for Uncommon Codepoints: Add List to Display Characters Involved)
- #120261 (Provide structured suggestion to use trait objects in some cases of `if` arm type divergence)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Add `#[coverage(off)]` to closures introduced by `#[test]` and `#[bench]`
These closures are an internal implementation detail of the `#[test]` and `#[bench]` attribute macros, so from a user perspective there is no reason to instrument them for coverage.
Skipping them makes coverage reports slightly cleaner, and will also allow other changes to span processing during coverage instrumentation, without having to worry about how they affect the `#[test]` macro.
The `#[coverage(off)]` attribute has no effect when `-Cinstrument-coverage` is not used.
Fixes#120046.
---
Note that this PR has no effect on the user-written function that has the `#[test]` attribute attached to it. That function will still be instrumented as normal.
Manually implement derived `NonZero` traits.
Step 3 as mentioned in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/100428#pullrequestreview-1767139731.
Manually implement the traits that would cause “borrow of layout constrained field with interior mutability” errors when switching to `NonZero<T>`.
r? ```@dtolnay```
Use `Self` in `NonZero*` implementations.
This slightly reduces the size of the eventual diff when making these generic, since this can be merged independently.
Use `assert_unchecked` instead of `assume` intrinsic in the standard library
Now that a public wrapper for the `assume` intrinsic exists, we can use it in the standard library.
CC #119131
Revert stabilization of trait_upcasting feature
Reverts #118133
This reverts commit 6d2b84b3ed, reversing changes made to 73bc12199e.
The feature has a soundness bug:
* #120222
It is unclear to me whether we'll actually want to destabilize, but I thought it was still prudent to open the PR for easy destabilization once we get there.
Consolidate logic around resolving built-in coroutine trait impls
Deduplicates a lot of code. Requires defining a new lang item for `Coroutine::resume` for consistency, but it seems not harmful at worst, and potentially later useful at best.
r? oli-obk
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #118714 ( Explanation that fields are being used when deriving `(Partial)Ord` on enums)
- #119710 (Improve `let_underscore_lock`)
- #119726 (Tweak Library Integer Division Docs)
- #119746 (rustdoc: hide modals when resizing the sidebar)
- #119986 (Fix error counting)
- #120194 (Shorten `#[must_use]` Diagnostic Message for `Option::is_none`)
- #120200 (Correct the anchor of an URL in an error message)
- #120203 (Replace `#!/bin/bash` with `#!/usr/bin/env bash` in rust-installer tests)
- #120212 (Give nnethercote more reviews)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Shorten `#[must_use]` Diagnostic Message for `Option::is_none`
This shortens the `#[must_use]` diagnostics displayed, in light of the [review comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/62431/files#r300819839) on when this was originally added.
Tweak Library Integer Division Docs
Improved the documentation and diagnostics related to panicking in the division-like methods in std:
* For signed methods that can overflow, clarified "results in overflow" to "self is -1 and rhs is Self::MIN." This is more concise than saying "results in overflow" and then explaining how it could overflow.
* For floor/ceil_div, corrected the documentation and made it more like the documentation in other methods.
* For signed methods that can overflow, explicitly mention that they are not affected by compiler flags.
* Removed all unused rustc_inherit_overflow_checks attributes. The non-division-like operations will never overflow.
* Added track_caller attributes to all methods that can panic. The panic messages will always be correct. For example, division methods all have / before %.
* Edited the saturating_div documentation to be consistent with similar methods.
Explanation that fields are being used when deriving `(Partial)Ord` on enums
When deriving `std::cmp::Ord` or `std::cmp::PartialOrd` on enums, their fields are compared if the variants are equal.
This means that the last assertion in the following snipped panics.
```rust
use std::cmp::{PartialEq, Eq, PartialOrd, Ord};
#[derive(PartialEq, Eq, PartialOrd, Ord)]
enum Sizes {
Small(usize),
Big(usize),
}
fn main() {
let a = Sizes::Big(3);
let b = Sizes::Big(5);
let c = Sizes::Small(10);
assert!( c < a);
assert_eq!(a, c);
}
```
This is more often expected behavior than not, and can be easily circumvented, as discussed in [this thread](https://users.rust-lang.org/t/how-to-sort-enum-variants/52291/4).
But it is addressed nowhere in the documentation, yet.
So I stumbled across this, as I personally did not expect fields being used in `PartialOrd`.
I added the explanation to the documentation.
Add `#[track_caller]` to the "From implies Into" impl
This pr implements what was mentioned in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/77474#issuecomment-1074480790
This follows from my URLO https://users.rust-lang.org/t/104497
```rust
#![allow(warnings)]
fn main() {
// Gives a good location
let _: Result<(), Loc> = dbg!(Err::<(), _>(()).map_err(|e| e.into()));
// still doesn't work, gives location of `FnOnce::call_once()`
let _: Result<(), Loc> = dbg!(Err::<(), _>(()).map_err(Into::into));
}
#[derive(Debug)]
pub struct Loc {
pub l: &'static std::panic::Location<'static>,
}
impl From<()> for Loc {
#[track_caller]
fn from(_: ()) -> Self {
Loc {
l: std::panic::Location::caller(),
}
}
}
```
Implement iterator specialization traits on more adapters
This adds
* `TrustedLen` to `Skip` and `StepBy`
* `TrustedRandomAccess` to `Skip`
* `InPlaceIterable` and `SourceIter` to `Copied` and `Cloned`
The first two might improve performance in the compiler itself since `skip` is used in several places. Constellations that would exercise the last point are probably rare since it would require an owning iterator that has references as Items somewhere in its iterator pipeline.
Improvements for `Skip`:
```
# old
test iter::bench_skip_trusted_random_access ... bench: 8,335 ns/iter (+/- 90)
# new
test iter::bench_skip_trusted_random_access ... bench: 2,753 ns/iter (+/- 27)
```
Add Ipv6Addr::is_ipv4_mapped
This change consists of cherry-picking the content from the original PR[1], which got closed due to inactivity, and applying the following changes:
* Resolving merge conflicts (obviously)
* Linked to to_ipv4_mapped instead of to_ipv4 in the documentation (seems more appropriate)
* Added the must_use and rustc_const_unstable attributes the original didn't have
I think it's a reasonably useful method to have.
[1] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/86490
Use `bool` instead of `PartiolOrd` as return value of the comparison closure in `{slice,Iteraotr}::is_sorted_by`
Changes the function signature of the closure given to `{slice,Iteraotr}::is_sorted_by` to return a `bool` instead of a `PartiolOrd` as suggested by the libs-api team here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53485#issuecomment-1766411980.
This means these functions now return true if the closure returns true for all the pairs of values.
Implement strict integer operations that panic on overflow
This PR implements the first part of the ACP for adding panic on overflow style arithmetic operations (https://github.com/rust-lang/libs-team/issues/270), mentioned in #116064.
It adds the following operations on both signed and unsigned integers:
- `strict_add`
- `strict_sub`
- `strict_mul`
- `strict_div`
- `strict_div_euclid`
- `strict_rem`
- `strict_rem_euclid`
- `strict_neg`
- `strict_shl`
- `strict_shr`
- `strict_pow`
Additionally, signed integers have:
- `strict_add_unsigned`
- `strict_sub_unsigned`
- `strict_abs`
And unsigned integers have:
- `strict_add_signed`
The `div` and `rem` operations are the same as normal division and remainder but are added for completeness similar to the corresponding `wrapping_*` operations.
I'm not sure if I missed any operations, I basically found them from the `wrapping_*` and `checked_*` operations on both integer types.
Tweak the threshold for chunked swapping
Thanks to `@AngelicosPhosphoros` for the tests here, which I copied from #98892.
This is an experiment as a simple alternative to that PR that just tweaks the existing threshold, since that PR showed that 3×Align (like `String`) currently doesn't work as well as it could.
Introduce split_at_checked and split_at_mut_checked methods to slices
types (including str) which are non-panicking versions of split_at and
split_at_mut respectively. This is analogous to get method being
non-panicking version of indexing.
This also removes
* impl From<&Context> for ContextBuilder
* Context::try_waker()
The from implementation is removed because now that
wakers are always supported, there are less incentives
to override the current context. Before, the incentive
was to add Waker support to a reactor that didn't have
any.
Stabilize single-field offset_of
This PR stabilizes offset_of for a single field. There has been some further discussion at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/106655 about whether this is advisable; I'm opening the PR anyway so that the code is available.
Fix overflow check
Make MIRI choose the path randomly and rename the intrinsic
Add back test
Add miri test and make it operate on `ptr`
Define `llvm.is.constant` for primitives
Update MIRI comment and fix test in stage2
Add const eval test
Clarify that both branches must have the same side effects
guaranteed non guarantee
use immediate type instead
Co-Authored-By: Ralf Jung <post@ralfj.de>
Change return type of unstable `Waker::noop()` from `Waker` to `&Waker`.
The advantage of this is that it does not need to be assigned to a variable to be used in a `Context` creation, which is the most common thing to want to do with a noop waker. It also avoids unnecessarily executing the dynamically dispatched drop function when the noop waker is dropped.
If an owned noop waker is desired, it can be created by cloning, but the reverse is harder to do since it requires declaring a constant. Alternatively, both versions could be provided, like `futures::task::noop_waker()` and `futures::task::noop_waker_ref()`, but that seems to me to be API clutter for a very small benefit, whereas having the `&'static` reference available is a large reduction in boilerplate.
[Previous discussion on the tracking issue starting here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/98286#issuecomment-1862159766)
Stabilize `slice_first_last_chunk`
This PR does a few different things based around stabilizing `slice_first_last_chunk`. They are split up so this PR can be by-commit reviewed, I can move parts to a separate PR if desired.
This feature provides a very elegant API to extract arrays from either end of a slice, such as for parsing integers from binary data.
## Stabilize `slice_first_last_chunk`
ACP: https://github.com/rust-lang/libs-team/issues/69
Implementation: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90091
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/111774
This stabilizes the functionality from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/111774:
```rust
impl [T] {
pub const fn first_chunk<const N: usize>(&self) -> Option<&[T; N]>;
pub fn first_chunk_mut<const N: usize>(&mut self) -> Option<&mut [T; N]>;
pub const fn last_chunk<const N: usize>(&self) -> Option<&[T; N]>;
pub fn last_chunk_mut<const N: usize>(&mut self) -> Option<&mut [T; N]>;
pub const fn split_first_chunk<const N: usize>(&self) -> Option<(&[T; N], &[T])>;
pub fn split_first_chunk_mut<const N: usize>(&mut self) -> Option<(&mut [T; N], &mut [T])>;
pub const fn split_last_chunk<const N: usize>(&self) -> Option<(&[T], &[T; N])>;
pub fn split_last_chunk_mut<const N: usize>(&mut self) -> Option<(&mut [T], &mut [T; N])>;
}
```
Const stabilization is included for all non-mut methods, which are blocked on `const_mut_refs`. This change includes marking the trivial function `slice_split_at_unchecked` const-stable for internal use (but not fully stable).
## Remove `split_array` slice methods
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90091
Implementation: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83233#pullrequestreview-780315524
This PR also removes the following unstable methods from the `split_array` feature, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90091:
```rust
impl<T> [T] {
pub fn split_array_ref<const N: usize>(&self) -> (&[T; N], &[T]);
pub fn split_array_mut<const N: usize>(&mut self) -> (&mut [T; N], &mut [T]);
pub fn rsplit_array_ref<const N: usize>(&self) -> (&[T], &[T; N]);
pub fn rsplit_array_mut<const N: usize>(&mut self) -> (&mut [T], &mut [T; N]);
}
```
This is done because discussion at #90091 and its implementation PR indicate a strong preference for nonpanicking APIs that return `Option`. The only difference between functions under the `split_array` and `slice_first_last_chunk` features is `Option` vs. panic, so remove the duplicates as part of this stabilization.
This does not affect the array methods from `split_array`. We will want to revisit these once `generic_const_exprs` is further along.
## Reverse order of return tuple for `split_last_chunk{,_mut}`
An unresolved question for #111774 is whether to return `(preceding_slice, last_chunk)` (`(&[T], &[T; N])`) or the reverse (`(&[T; N], &[T])`), from `split_last_chunk` and `split_last_chunk_mut`. It is currently implemented as `(last_chunk, preceding_slice)` which matches `split_last -> (&T, &[T])`. The first commit changes these to `(&[T], &[T; N])` for these reasons:
- More consistent with other splitting methods that return multiple values: `str::rsplit_once`, `slice::split_at{,_mut}`, `slice::align_to` all return tuples with the items in order
- More intuitive (arguably opinion, but it is consistent with other language elements like pattern matching `let [a, b, rest @ ..] ...`
- If we ever added a varidic way to obtain multiple chunks, it would likely return something in order: `.split_many_last::<(2, 4)>() -> (&[T], &[T; 2], &[T; 4])`
- It is the ordering used in the `rsplit_array` methods
I think the inconsistency with `split_last` could be acceptable in this case, since for `split_last` the scalar `&T` doesn't have any internal order to maintain with the other items.
## Unresolved questions
Do we want to reserve the same names on `[u8; N]` to avoid inference confusion? https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/117561#issuecomment-1793388647
---
`slice_first_last_chunk` has only been around since early 2023, but `split_array` has been around since 2021.
`@rustbot` label -T-libs +T-libs-api -T-libs +needs-fcp
cc `@rust-lang/wg-const-eval,` `@scottmcm` who raised this topic, `@clarfonthey` implementer of `slice_first_last_chunk` `@jethrogb` implementer of `split_array`
Zulip discussion: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/219381-t-libs/topic/Stabilizing.20array-from-slice.20*something*.3FFixes: #111774
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.
Docs: Use non-SeqCst in module example of atomics
I done this for this reasons:
1. The example now shows that there is more Orderings than just SeqCst.
2. People who would copy from example would now have more suitable orderings for the job.
3. SeqCst is both much harder to reason about and not needed in most situations.
IMHO, we should encourage people to think and use memory orderings that is suitable to task instead of blindly defaulting to SeqCst.
r? `@m-ou-se`
Consolidate all associated items on the NonZero integer types into a single impl block per type
**Before:**
```rust
#[repr(transparent)]
#[rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_start(1)]
pub struct NonZeroI8(i8);
impl NonZeroI8 {
pub const fn new(n: i8) -> Option<Self> ...
pub const fn get(self) -> i8 ...
}
impl NonZeroI8 {
pub const fn leading_zeros(self) -> u32 ...
pub const fn trailing_zeros(self) -> u32 ...
}
impl NonZeroI8 {
pub const fn abs(self) -> NonZeroI8 ...
}
...
```
**After:**
```rust
#[repr(transparent)]
#[rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_start(1)]
pub struct NonZeroI8(i8);
impl NonZeroI8 {
pub const fn new(n: i8) -> Option<Self> ...
pub const fn get(self) -> i8 ...
pub const fn leading_zeros(self) -> u32 ...
pub const fn trailing_zeros(self) -> u32 ...
pub const fn abs(self) -> NonZeroI8 ...
...
}
```
Having 6-7 different impl blocks per type is not such a problem in today's implementation, but becomes awful upon the switch to a generic `NonZero<T>` type (context: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82363#issuecomment-921513910).
In the implementation from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/100428, there end up being **67** impl blocks on that type.
<img src="https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/assets/1940490/5b68bd6f-8a36-4922-baa3-348e30dbfcc1" width="200"><img src="https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/assets/1940490/2cfec71e-c2cd-4361-a542-487f13f435d9" width="200"><img src="https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/assets/1940490/2fe00337-7307-405d-9036-6fe1e58b2627" width="200">
Without the refactor to a single impl block first, introducing `NonZero<T>` would be a usability regression compared to today's separate pages per type. With all those blocks expanded, Ctrl+F is obnoxious because you need to skip 12× past every match you don't care about. With all the blocks collapsed, Ctrl+F is useless. Getting to a state in which exactly one type's (e.g. `NonZero<u32>`) impl blocks are expanded while the rest are collapsed is annoying.
After this refactor to a single impl block, we can move forward with making `NonZero<T>` a generic struct whose docs all go on the same rustdoc page. The rustdoc will have 12 impl blocks, one per choice of `T` supported by the standard library. The reader can expand a single one of those impl blocks e.g. `NonZero<u32>` to understand the entire API of that type.
Note that moving the API into a generic `impl<T> NonZero<T> { ... }` is not going to be an option until after `NonZero<T>` has been stabilized, which may be months or years after its introduction. During the period while generic `NonZero` is unstable, it will be extra important to offer good documentation on all methods demonstrating the API being used through the stable aliases such as `NonZeroI8`.
This PR follows a `key = $value` syntax for the macros which is similar to the macros we already use for producing a single large impl block on the integer primitives.
1dd4db5062/library/core/src/num/mod.rs (L288-L309)
Best reviewed one commit at a time.
The advantage of this is that it does not need to be assigned to a
variable to be used in a `Context` creation, which is the most common
thing to want to do with a noop waker.
If an owned noop waker is desired, it can be created by cloning, but the
reverse is harder. Alternatively, both versions could be provided, like
`futures::task::noop_waker()` and `futures::task::noop_waker_ref()`, but
that seems to me to be API clutter for a very small benefit, whereas
having the `&'static` reference available is a large benefit.
Previous discussion on the tracking issue starting here:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/98286#issuecomment-1862159766
The internal, unstable field of `Pin` can conflict with fields from the
inner type accessed via the `Deref` impl. Rename it from `pointer` to
`__pointer`, to make it less likely to conflict with anything else.
Add private `NonZero<T>` type alias.
According to step 2 suggested in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/100428#pullrequestreview-1767139731.
This adds a private type alias for `NonZero<T>` so that some parts of the code can already start using `NonZero<T>` syntax.
Using `NonZero<T>` for `convert` and other parts which implement `From` doesn't work while it is a type alias, since this results in conflicting implementations.
Tune the inlinability of `unwrap`
Fixes#115463
cc `@thomcc`
This tweaks `unwrap` on ~~`Option` &~~ `Result` to be two parts:
- `#[inline(always)]` for checking the discriminant
- `#[cold]` for actually panicking
The idea here is that checking the discriminant on a `Result` ~~or `Option`~~ should always be trivial enough to be worth inlining, even in `opt-level=z`, especially compared to passing it to a function.
As seen in the issue and codegen test, this will hopefully help particularly for things like `.try_into().unwrap()`s that are actually infallible, but in a way that's only visible with the inlining.
EDIT: I've restricted this to `Result` to avoid combining effects
Later in this stack, as the nonzero_integers macro is going to be
responsible for producing a larger fraction of the API for the NonZero
integer types, it will need to receive a number of additional arguments
beyond the ones currently seen here.
Additional arguments, especially named arguments across multiple lines,
will turn out clearer if everything in one macro call is for the same
NonZero type.
This commit adopts a similar arrangement to what we do for generating
the API of the integer primitives (`impl u8` etc), which also generate a
single type's API per top-level macro call, rather than generating all
12 impl blocks for the 12 types from one macro call.
This way all the other macros defined in this module, such as
nonzero_leading_trailing_zeros, are available to call within the expansion of
nonzero_integers.
(Macros defined by macro_rules cannot be called from the same module above the
location of the macro_rules.)
In this commit the ability to call things like nonzero_leading_trailing_zeros is
not immediately used, but later commits in this stack will be consolidating the
entire API of NonZeroT to be generated through nonzero_integers, and will need
to make use of some of the other macros to do that.
Add Benchmarks for int_pow Methods.
There is quite a bit of room for improvement in performance of the `int_pow` family of methods. I added benchmarks for those functions. In particular, there are benchmarks for small compile-time bases to measure the effect of #114390. ~~I added a lot (245), but all but 22 of them are marked with `#[ignore]`. There are a lot of macros, and I would appreciate feedback on how to simplify them.~~
~~To run benches relevant to #114390, use `./x bench core --stage 1 -- pow_base_const --include-ignored`.~~
This stabilizes all methods under `slice_first_last_chunk`.
Additionally, it const stabilizes the non-mut functions and moves the `_mut`
functions under `const_slice_first_last_chunk`. These are blocked on
`const_mut_refs`.
As part of this change, `slice_split_at_unchecked` was marked const-stable for
internal use (but not fully stable).
A more efficient slice comparison implementation for T: !BytewiseEq
(This is a follow up PR on #113654)
This PR changes the implementation for `[T]` slice comparison when `T: !BytewiseEq`. The previous implementation using zip was not optimized properly by the compiler, which didn't leverage the fact that both length were equal. Performance improvements are for example 20% when testing that `[Some(0_u64); 4096].as_slice() == [Some(0_u64); 4096].as_slice()`.
Use `assert_unsafe_precondition` for `char::from_u32_unchecked`
Use `assert_unsafe_precondition` in `char::from_u32_unchecked` so that it can be stabilized as `const`.
Rewrite `pin` module documentation to clarify usage and invariants
The documentation of `pin` today does not give a complete treatment of pinning from first principles, nor does it adequately help build intuition and understanding for how the different elements of the pinning story fit together.
This rewrite attempts to address these in a way that makes the concept more approachable while also making the documentation more normative.
This PR picks up where `@mcy` left off in #88500 (thanks to him for the original work and `@Manishearth` for mentioning it such that I originally found it). I've directly incorporated much of the feedback left on the original PR and have rewritten and changed some of the main conceits of the prose to better adhere to the feedback from the reviewers on that PR or just explain something in (hopefully) a better way.
