Update standard library for IntoIterator implementation of arrays
This PR partially resolves issue #84513 of updating the standard library part.
I haven't found any remaining doctest examples which are using iterators over e.g. &i32 instead of just i32 in the standard library. Can anyone point me to them if there's remaining any?
Thanks!
r? ```@m-ou-se```
Implement the new desugaring from `try_trait_v2`
~~Currently blocked on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84782, which has a PR in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/84811~~ Rebased atop that fix.
`try_trait_v2` tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84277
Unfortunately this is already touching a ton of things, so if you have suggestions for good ways to split it up, I'd be happy to hear them. (The combination between the use in the library, the compiler changes, the corresponding diagnostic differences, even MIR tests mean that I don't really have a great plan for it other than trying to have decently-readable commits.
r? `@ghost`
~~(This probably shouldn't go in during the last week before the fork anyway.)~~ Fork happened.
Stablize {HashMap,BTreeMap}::into_{keys,values}
I would propose to stabilize `{HashMap,BTreeMap}::into_{keys,values}`( aka. `map_into_keys_values`).
Closes#75294.
For certain sorts of systems, programming, it's deemed essential that
all allocation failures be explicitly handled where they occur. For
example, see Linus Torvald's opinion in [1]. Merely not calling global
panic handlers, or always `try_reserving` first (for vectors), is not
deemed good enough, because the mere presence of the global OOM handlers
is burdens static analysis.
One option for these projects to use rust would just be to skip `alloc`,
rolling their own allocation abstractions. But this would, in my
opinion be a real shame. `alloc` has a few `try_*` methods already, and
we could easily have more. Features like custom allocator support also
demonstrate and existing to support diverse use-cases with the same
abstractions.
A natural way to add such a feature flag would a Cargo feature, but
there are currently uncertainties around how std library crate's Cargo
features may or not be stable, so to avoid any risk of stabilizing by
mistake we are going with a more low-level "raw cfg" token, which
cannot be interacted with via Cargo alone.
Note also that since there is no notion of "default cfg tokens" outside
of Cargo features, we have to invert the condition from
`global_oom_handling` to to `not(no_global_oom_handling)`. This breaks
the monotonicity that would be important for a Cargo feature (i.e.
turning on more features should never break compatibility), but it
doesn't matter for raw cfg tokens which are not intended to be
"constraint solved" by Cargo or anything else.
To support this use-case we create a new feature, "global-oom-handling",
on by default, and put the global OOM handler infra and everything else
it that depends on it behind it. By default, nothing is changed, but
users concerned about global handling can make sure it is disabled, and
be confident that all OOM handling is local and explicit.
For this first iteration, non-flat collections are outright disabled.
`Vec` and `String` don't yet have `try_*` allocation methods, but are
kept anyways since they can be oom-safely created "from parts", and we
hope to add those `try_` methods in the future.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wh_sNLoz84AUUzuqXEsYH35u=8HV3vK-jbRbJ_B-JjGrg@mail.gmail.com/
BTree: move blocks around in node.rs
Without changing any names or implementation, reorder some members:
- Move down the ones defined long ago on the demised `struct Root`, to below the definition of their current host `struct NodeRef`.
- Move up some defined on `struct NodeRef` that are interspersed with those defined on `struct Handle`.
- Move up the `correct_…` methods squeezed between the two flavours of `push`.
- Move the unchecked static downcasts (`cast_to_…`) after the upcasts (`forget_`) and the (weirdly named) dynamic downcasts (`force`).
r? ````@Mark-Simulacrum````
BTree: no longer search arrays twice to check Ord
A possible addition to / partial replacement of #83147: no longer linearly search the upper bound of a range in the initial portion of the keys we already know are below the lower bound.
- Should be faster: fewer key comparisons at the cost of some instructions dealing with offsets
- Makes code a little more complicated.
- No longer detects ill-defined `Ord` implementations, but that wasn't a publicised feature, and was quite incomplete, and was only done in the `range` and `range_mut` methods.
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
alloc: Added `as_slice` method to `BinaryHeap` collection
I initially asked about whether it is useful addition on https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/should-i-add-as-slice-method-to-binaryheap/13816, and it seems there were no objections, so went ahead with this PR.
> There is [`BinaryHeap::into_vec`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/struct.BinaryHeap.html#method.into_vec), but it consumes the value. I wonder if there is API design limitation that should be taken into account. Implementation-wise, the inner buffer is just a Vec, so it is trivial to expose as_slice from it.
Please, guide me through if I need to add tests or something else.
UPD: Tracking issue #83659
Fix overflowing length in Vec<ZST> to VecDeque
`Vec` can hold up to `usize::MAX` ZST items, but `VecDeque` has a lower
limit to keep its raw capacity as a power of two, so we should check
that in `From<Vec<T>> for VecDeque<T>`. We can also simplify the
capacity check for the remaining non-ZST case.
Before this fix, the new test would fail on the length:
```
thread 'collections::vec_deque::tests::test_from_vec_zst_overflow' panicked at 'assertion failed: `(left == right)`
left: `0`,
right: `9223372036854775808`', library/alloc/src/collections/vec_deque/tests.rs:474:5
note: panic did not contain expected string
panic message: `"assertion failed: `(left == right)`\n left: `0`,\n right: `9223372036854775808`"`,
expected substring: `"capacity overflow"`
```
That was a result of `len()` using a mask `& (size - 1)` with the
improper length. Now we do get a "capacity overflow" panic as soon as
that `VecDeque::from(vec)` is attempted.
Fixes#80167.
Add more links between hash and btree collections
- Link from `core::hash` to `HashMap` and `HashSet`
- Link from HashMap and HashSet to the module-level documentation on
when to use the collection
- Link from several collections to Wikipedia articles on the general
concept
See also https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/81989#issuecomment-783920840.
`Vec` can hold up to `usize::MAX` ZST items, but `VecDeque` has a lower
limit to keep its raw capacity as a power of two, so we should check
that in `From<Vec<T>> for VecDeque<T>`. We can also simplify the
capacity check for the remaining non-ZST case.
Before this fix, the new test would fail on the length:
```
thread 'collections::vec_deque::tests::test_from_vec_zst_overflow' panicked at 'assertion failed: `(left == right)`
left: `0`,
right: `9223372036854775808`', library/alloc/src/collections/vec_deque/tests.rs:474:5
note: panic did not contain expected string
panic message: `"assertion failed: `(left == right)`\n left: `0`,\n right: `9223372036854775808`"`,
expected substring: `"capacity overflow"`
```
That was a result of `len()` using a mask `& (size - 1)` with the
improper length. Now we do get a "capacity overflow" panic as soon as
that `VecDeque::from(vec)` is attempted.
Improve sift_down performance in BinaryHeap
Replacing `child < end - 1` with `child <= end.saturating_sub(2)` in `BinaryHeap::sift_down_range` (surprisingly) results in a significant speedup of `BinaryHeap::into_sorted_vec`. The same substitution can be done for `BinaryHeap::sift_down_to_bottom`, which causes a slight but probably statistically insignificant speedup for `BinaryHeap::pop`. It's interesting that benchmarks aside from `bench_into_sorted_vec` are barely affected, even those that do use `sift_down_*` methods internally.
| Benchmark | Before (ns/iter) | After (ns/iter) | Speedup |
|--------------------------|------------------|-----------------|---------|
| bench_find_smallest_1000<sup>1</sup> | 392,617 | 385,200 | 1.02 |
| bench_from_vec<sup>1</sup> | 506,016 | 504,444 | 1.00 |
| bench_into_sorted_vec<sup>1</sup> | 476,869 | 384,458 | 1.24 |
| bench_peek_mut_deref_mut<sup>3</sup> | 518,753 | 519,792 | 1.00 |
| bench_pop<sup>2</sup> | 446,718 | 444,409 | 1.01 |
| bench_push<sup>3</sup> | 772,481 | 770,208 | 1.00 |
<sup>1</sup>: internally calls `sift_down_range`
<sup>2</sup>: internally calls `sift_down_to_bottom`
<sup>3</sup>: should not be affected
Add {BTreeMap,HashMap}::try_insert
`{BTreeMap,HashMap}::insert(key, new_val)` returns `Some(old_val)` if the key was already in the map. It's often useful to assert no duplicate values are inserted.
We experimented with `map.insert(key, val).unwrap_none()` (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/62633), but decided that that's not the kind of method we'd like to have on `Option`s.
`insert` always succeeds because it replaces the old value if it exists. One could argue that `insert()` is never the right method for panicking on duplicates, since already handles that case by replacing the value, only allowing you to panic after that already happened.
This PR adds a `try_insert` method that instead returns a `Result::Err` when the key already exists. This error contains both the `OccupiedEntry` and the value that was supposed to be inserted. This means that unwrapping that result gives more context:
```rust
map.insert(10, "world").unwrap_none();
// thread 'main' panicked at 'called `Option::unwrap_none()` on a `Some` value: "hello"', src/main.rs:8:29
```
```rust
map.try_insert(10, "world").unwrap();
// thread 'main' panicked at 'called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value:
// OccupiedError { key: 10, old_value: "hello", new_value: "world" }', src/main.rs:6:33
```
It also allows handling the failure in any other way, as you have full access to the `OccupiedEntry` and the value.
`try_insert` returns a reference to the value in case of success, making it an alternative to `.entry(key).or_insert(value)`.
r? ```@Amanieu```
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/3092
Implement NOOP_METHOD_CALL lint
Implements the beginnings of https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/issues/67 - a lint for detecting noop method calls (e.g, calling `<&T as Clone>::clone()` when `T: !Clone`).
This PR does not fully realize the vision and has a few limitations that need to be addressed either before merging or in subsequent PRs:
* [ ] No UFCS support
* [ ] The warning message is pretty plain
* [ ] Doesn't work for `ToOwned`
The implementation uses [`Instance::resolve`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/instance/struct.Instance.html#method.resolve) which is normally later in the compiler. It seems that there are some invariants that this function relies on that we try our best to respect. For instance, it expects substitutions to have happened, which haven't yet performed, but we check first for `needs_subst` to ensure we're dealing with a monomorphic type.
Thank you to ```@davidtwco,``` ```@Aaron1011,``` and ```@wesleywiser``` for helping me at various points through out this PR ❤️.
Yuki Okushi