improve offset_from docs
`@thomcc` pointed out that the current docs leave it kind of unclear how one can satisfy the "no wrapping around `isize` or the address space" requirement of `offset_from`, so make the docs clearer about that.
FWIW, I don't think I entirely agree with that second paragraph about large objects (that I left mostly unchanged here). LLVM, to my knowledge, fundamentally assumes that all allocations fit into an `isize::MAX`. So in that sense creating a larger allocation is simply UB. I would expect a guarantee that Rust heap allocation methods will never return allocations larger than `isize::MAX` (or rather, Rust heap allocation methods should require that the `Layout` is no larger than `isize::MAX`). However, I cannot find any such requirement documented currently. Large allocations are not mentioned at all in the allocator docs, which is quite surprising -- even if we say that such allocations are not insta-UB (which I think is incompatible with LLVM), they are still extremely footgunny since `ptr::offset`/`ptr::add` do not support offsetting by more than `isize::MAX` bytes.
Furthermore, the allocator docs don't even say anything about allocations wrapping around the address space. But that is certainly something allocators must ensure never happens; we cannot expect clients to defend against this.
Cc `@rust-lang/wg-allocators`
Improve transmute docs with further clarifications
Closes#82493.
Please let me know if any of the new wording sounds off, English is not my mother tongue.
Prevent specialized ZipImpl from calling `__iterator_get_unchecked` twice with the same index
Fixes#82291
It's open for review, but conflicts with #82289, wait before merging. The conflict involves only the new test, so it should be rather trivial to fix.
Make some Option, Result methods unstably const
The following methods are now unstably const:
- Option::transpose
- Option::flatten
- Result::flatten
While some methods for could likely be made `const` in the future, nearly all of them require something to be dropped at compile-time, which isn't currently supported. The functions listed above should have a trivial path to stabilization.
Improve slice.binary_search_by()'s best-case performance to O(1)
This PR aimed to improve the [slice.binary_search_by()](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.slice.html#method.binary_search_by)'s best-case performance to O(1).
# Noticed
I don't know why the docs of `binary_search_by` said `"If there are multiple matches, then any one of the matches could be returned."`, but the implementation isn't the same thing. Actually, it returns the **last one** if multiple matches found.
Then we got two options:
## If returns the last one is the correct or desired result
Then I can rectify the docs and revert my changes.
## If the docs are correct or desired result
Then my changes can be merged after fully reviewed.
However, if my PR gets merged, another issue raised: this could be a **breaking change** since if multiple matches found, the returning order no longer the last one instead of it could be any one.
For example:
```rust
let mut s = vec![0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55];
let num = 1;
let idx = s.binary_search(&num);
s.insert(idx, 2);
// Old implementations
assert_eq!(s, [0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 42, 55]);
// New implementations
assert_eq!(s, [0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 42, 55]);
```
# Benchmarking
**Old implementations**
```sh
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 76 ns/iter (+/- 5)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 77 ns/iter (+/- 17)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 183 ns/iter (+/- 23)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 185 ns/iter (+/- 19)
```
**New implementations (1)**
Implemented by this PR.
```rust
if cmp == Equal {
return Ok(mid);
} else if cmp == Less {
base = mid
}
```
```sh
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 58 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 37 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 76 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 6)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 200 ns/iter (+/- 30)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 157 ns/iter (+/- 6)
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 8)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 37 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 77 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 198 ns/iter (+/- 21)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 158 ns/iter (+/- 11)
```
**New implementations (2)**
Suggested by `@nbdd0121` in [comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74024#issuecomment-665430239).
```rust
base = if cmp == Greater { base } else { mid };
if cmp == Equal { break }
```
```sh
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 7)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 37 ns/iter (+/- 5)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 75 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 56 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 195 ns/iter (+/- 15)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 151 ns/iter (+/- 7)
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 38 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 77 ns/iter (+/- 11)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 194 ns/iter (+/- 15)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 151 ns/iter (+/- 18)
```
I run some benchmarking testings against on two implementations. The new implementation has a lot of improvement in duplicates cases, while in `binary_search_l3` case, it's a little bit slower than the old one.
Add diagnostic item to `Default` trait
This PR adds diagnostic item to `Default` trait to be used by rust-lang/rust-clippy#6562 issue.
Also fixes the obsolete path to the `symbols.rs` file in the comment.
Add assert_matches macro.
This adds `assert_matches!(expression, pattern)`.
Unlike the other asserts, this one ~~consumes the expression~~ may consume the expression, to be able to match the pattern. (It could add a `&` implicitly, but that's noticable in the pattern, and will make a consuming guard impossible.)
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/62633#issuecomment-790737853
This re-uses the same `left: .. right: ..` output as the `assert_eq` and `assert_ne` macros, but with the pattern as the right part:
assert_eq:
```
assertion failed: `(left == right)`
left: `Some("asdf")`,
right: `None`
```
assert_matches:
```
assertion failed: `(left matches right)`
left: `Ok("asdf")`,
right: `Err(_)`
```
cc ```@cuviper```
Add suggestion `.collect()` for iterators in iterators
Closes#81584
```
error[E0515]: cannot return value referencing function parameter `y`
--> main3.rs:4:38
|
4 | ... .map(|y| y.iter().map(|x| x + 1))
| -^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| |
| returns a value referencing data owned by the current function
| `y` is borrowed here
| help: Maybe use `.collect()` to allocate the iterator
```
Added the suggestion: `help: Maybe use `.collect()` to allocate the iterator`
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 ❤️.
enable atomic_min/max tests in Miri
Thanks to `@henryboisdequin` and `@GregBowyer,` Miri now supports these intrinsics. :)
Also includes the necessary Miri update.
Turn may_have_side_effect into an associated constant
The `may_have_side_effect` is an implementation detail of `TrustedRandomAccess`
trait. It describes if obtaining an iterator element may have side effects. It
is currently implemented as an associated function.
Turn `may_have_side_effect` into an associated constant. This makes the
value immediately available to the optimizer.
Convert primitives in the standard library to intra-doc links
Blocked on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80181. I forgot that this needs to wait for the beta bump so the standard library can be documented with `doc --stage 0`.
Notably I didn't convert `core::slice` because it's like 50 links and I got scared 😨
- Rename `broken_intra_doc_links` to `rustdoc::broken_intra_doc_links`
- Ensure that the old lint names still work and give deprecation errors
- Register lints even when running doctests
Otherwise, all `rustdoc::` lints would be ignored.
- Register all existing lints as removed
This unfortunately doesn't work with `register_renamed` because tool
lints have not yet been registered when rustc is running. For similar
reasons, `check_backwards_compat` doesn't work either. Call
`register_removed` directly instead.
- Fix fallout
+ Rustdoc lints for compiler/
+ Rustdoc lints for library/
Note that this does *not* suggest `rustdoc::broken_intra_doc_links` for
`rustdoc::intra_doc_link_resolution_failure`, since there was no time
when the latter was valid.
Change twice used large const table to static
This table is used twice in core::num::dec2flt::algorithm::power_of_ten. According to the semantics of const, a separate huge definition of the table is inlined at both places.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/5233edcf1c7ee70ac25e4ec1115c3546f53d8a2d/library/core/src/num/dec2flt/algorithm.rs#L16-L22
Theoretically this gets cleaned up by optimization passes, but in practice I am experiencing a miscompile from LTO on this code. Making the table a static, which would only be defined a single time and not require attention from LTO, eliminates the miscompile and seems semantically more appropriate anyway. A separate bug report on the LTO bug is forthcoming.
Original addition of `const` is from #27307.
This table is used twice in core::num::dec2flt::algorithm::power_of_ten.
According to the semantics of const, a separate huge definition of the
table is inlined at both places.
fn power_of_ten(e: i16) -> Fp {
assert!(e >= table::MIN_E);
let i = e - table::MIN_E;
let sig = table::POWERS.0[i as usize];
let exp = table::POWERS.1[i as usize];
Fp { f: sig, e: exp }
}
Theoretically this gets cleaned up by optimization passes, but in
practice I am experiencing a miscompile from LTO on this code. Making
the table a static, which would only be defined a single time and not
require attention from LTO, eliminates the miscompile and seems
semantically more appropriate anyway. A separate bug report on the LTO
bug is forthcoming.
Specialize slice::fill with Copy type and u8/i8/bool
I don't expect rustperf could measure any perf improvements with this changes
since `slice::fill` is newly added.
Godbolt link for this change: <https://rust.godbolt.org/z/r3fzee>.
r? `@matthewjasper` since this patch added new specialization.
[librustdoc] Only split lang string on `,`, ` `, and `\t`
Split markdown lang strings into tokens on `,`.
The previous behavior was to split lang strings into tokens on any
character that wasn't a `_`, `_`, or alphanumeric.
This is a potentially breaking change, so please scrutinize! See discussion in #78344.
I noticed some test cases that made me wonder if there might have been some reason for the original behavior:
```
t("{.no_run .example}", false, true, Ignore::None, true, false, false, false, v(), None);
t("{.sh .should_panic}", true, false, Ignore::None, false, false, false, false, v(), None);
t("{.example .rust}", false, false, Ignore::None, true, false, false, false, v(), None);
t("{.test_harness .rust}", false, false, Ignore::None, true, true, false, false, v(), None);
```
It seemed pretty peculiar to specifically test lang strings in braces, with all the tokens prefixed by `.`.
I did some digging, and it looks like the test cases were added way back in [this commit from 2014](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/3fef7a74ca9a) by `@skade.`
It looks like they were added just to make sure that the splitting was permissive, and aren't testing that those strings in particular are accepted.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/78344.
Yuki Okushi