Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #87085 (Search result colors)
- #87090 (Make BTreeSet::split_off name elements like other set methods do)
- #87098 (Unignore some pretty printing tests)
- #87099 (Upgrade `cc` crate to 1.0.69)
- #87101 (Suggest a path separator if a stray colon is found in a match arm)
- #87102 (Add GUI test for "go to first" feature)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
create method overview docs for core::option and core::result
The `Option` and `Result` types have large lists of methods. They each could use an overview page of methods grouped by category. These proposed overviews include "truth tables" for the underappreciated boolean operators/combinators of these types. The methods are already somewhat categorized in the source, but some logical groupings are broken up by the necessities of putting related methods in different `impl` blocks, for example.
This is based on #86209, but those are small changes and unlikely to conflict.
stdio_locked: add tracking issue
Add the tracking issue number #86845 to the stability attributes for the implementation in #86799.
r? `@joshtriplett`
`@rustbot` label +A-io +C-cleanup +T-libs-api
Remove unstable `io::Cursor::remaining`
Adding `io::Cursor::remaining` in #86037 caused a conflict with the implementation of `bytes::Buf` for `io::Cursor`, leading to an error in nightly, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/86369#issuecomment-867723485.
This fixes the error by temporarily removing the `remaining` function.
r? `@yaahc`
Split MaybeUninit::write into new feature gate and stabilize it
This splits off the `MaybeUninit::write` function from the `maybe_uninit_extra` feature gate into a new `maybe_uninit_write` feature gate and stabilizes it.
Earlier work to improve the documentation of the write function: #86220
Tracking issue: #63567
[docs] Clarify behaviour of f64 and f32::sqrt when argument is negative zero
From IEEE 754 section 6.3:
> Except that squareRoot(−0) shall be −0, every numeric squareRoot result shall have a positive sign.
Fix linker error
Currently, `fs::hard_link` determines whether platforms have `linkat` based on the OS, and uses `link` if they don't. However, this heuristic does not work well if a platform provides `linkat` on newer versions but not on older ones. On old MacOS, this currently causes a linking error.
This commit fixes `fs::hard_link` by telling it to use `weak!` on macOS. This means that, on that operating system, we now check for `linkat` at runtime and use `link` if it is not available.
Fixes#80804.
`@rustbot` label T-libs-impl
On old macos systems, `fs::hard_link()` will follow symlinks.
This changes the test `symlink_hard_link` to exit early on
these systems, so that tests can pass.
`weak!` is needed in a test in another module. With macros
1.0, importing `weak!` would require reordering module
declarations in `std/src/lib.rs`, which is a bit too
evil.
- Add `:Sized` assertion in interpreter impl
- Use `Scalar::from_bool` instead of `ScalarInt: From<bool>`
- Remove unneeded comparison in intrinsic typeck
- Make this UB to call with undef, not just return undef in that case
special case for integer log10
Now that #80918 has been merged, this PR provides a faster version of `log10`.
The PR also adds some tests for values close to all powers of 10.
Update BTreeSet::drain_filter documentation
This commit makes the documentation of `BTreeSet::drain_filter` more
consistent with that of `BTreeMap::drain_filter` after the changes in
f0b8166870.
In particular, this explicitly documents the iteration order.
Use diagnostic items instead of lang items for rfc2229 migrations
This PR removes the `Send`, `UnwindSafe` and `RefUnwindSafe` lang items introduced in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/84730, and uses diagnostic items instead to check for `Send`, `UnwindSafe` and `RefUnwindSafe` traits for RFC2229 migrations.
r? ```@nikomatsakis```
BTree: consistently avoid unwrap_unchecked in iterators
Some iterator support functions named `_unchecked` internally use `unwrap`, some use `unwrap_unchecked`. This PR tries settling on `unwrap`. #86195 went up the same road but travelled way further and doesn't seem successful.
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
Revert "Add "every" as a doc alias for "all"."
This reverts commit 35450365ac (#81697) for "every" and closes#86554 in kind for "some".
The new [doc alias policy](https://std-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/documentation/doc-alias-policy.html) is that we don't want language-specific aliases like these JavaScript names, and we especially don't want to conflict with real names. While "every" is okay in the latter regard, its natural pair "some" makes a doc-search collision with `Option::Some`.
r? ```@m-ou-se```
rewrote documentation for thread::yield_now()
The old documentation suggested the use of yield_now for repeated
polling instead of discouraging it; it also made the false claim that
channels are implemented using yield_now. (They are not, except for
a corner case).
Rename some Rust 2021 lints to better names
Based on conversation in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85894.
Rename a bunch of Rust 2021 related lints:
Lints that are officially renamed because they are already in beta or stable:
* `disjoint_capture_migration` => `rust_2021_incompatible_closure_captures`
* `or_patterns_back_compat` => `rust_2021_incompatible_or_patterns`
* `non_fmt_panic` => `non_fmt_panics`
Lints that are renamed but don't require any back -compat work since they aren't yet in stable:
* `future_prelude_collision` => `rust_2021_prelude_collisions`
* `reserved_prefix` => `rust_2021_token_prefixes`
Lints that have been discussed but that I did not rename:
* ~`non_fmt_panic` and `bare_trait_object`: is making this plural worth the headache we might cause users?~
* `array_into_iter`: I'm unsure of a good name and whether bothering users with a name change is worth it.
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Add Integer::log variants
_This is another attempt at landing https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/70835, which was approved by the libs team but failed on Android tests through Bors. The text copied here is from the original issue. The only change made so far is the addition of non-`checked_` variants of the log methods._
_Tracking issue: #70887_
---
This implements `{log,log2,log10}` methods for all integer types. The implementation was provided by `@substack` for use in the stdlib.
_Note: I'm not big on math, so this PR is a best effort written with limited knowledge. It's likely I'll be getting things wrong, but happy to learn and correct. Please bare with me._
## Motivation
Calculating the logarithm of a number is a generally useful operation. Currently the stdlib only provides implementations for floats, which means that if we want to calculate the logarithm for an integer we have to cast it to a float and then back to an int.
> would be nice if there was an integer log2 instead of having to either use the f32 version or leading_zeros() which i have to verify the results of every time to be sure
_— [`@substack,` 2020-03-08](https://twitter.com/substack/status/1236445105197727744)_
At higher numbers converting from an integer to a float we also risk overflows. This means that Rust currently only provides log operations for a limited set of integers.
The process of doing log operations by converting between floats and integers is also prone to rounding errors. In the following example we're trying to calculate `base10` for an integer. We might try and calculate the `base2` for the values, and attempt [a base swap](https://www.rapidtables.com/math/algebra/Logarithm.html#log-rules) to arrive at `base10`. However because we're performing intermediate rounding we arrive at the wrong result:
```rust
// log10(900) = ~2.95 = 2
dbg!(900f32.log10() as u64);
// log base change rule: logb(x) = logc(x) / logc(b)
// log2(900) / log2(10) = 9/3 = 3
dbg!((900f32.log2() as u64) / (10f32.log2() as u64));
```
_[playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=6bd6c68b3539e400f9ca4fdc6fc2eed0)_
This is somewhat nuanced as a lot of the time it'll work well, but in real world code this could lead to some hard to track bugs. By providing correct log implementations directly on integers we can help prevent errors around this.
## Implementation notes
I checked whether LLVM intrinsics existed before implementing this, and none exist yet. ~~Also I couldn't really find a better way to write the `ilog` function. One option would be to make it a private method on the number, but I didn't see any precedent for that. I also didn't know where to best place the tests, so I added them to the bottom of the file. Even though they might seem like quite a lot they take no time to execute.~~
## References
- [Log rules](https://www.rapidtables.com/math/algebra/Logarithm.html#log-rules)
- [Rounding error playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=6bd6c68b3539e400f9ca4fdc6fc2eed0)
- [substack's tweet asking about integer log2 in the stdlib](https://twitter.com/substack/status/1236445105197727744)
- [Integer Logarithm, A. Jaffer 2008](https://people.csail.mit.edu/jaffer/III/ilog.pdf)
