Convert `&Option<T>` to `Option<&T>`
Run `ref_option` (#13336) on the Clippy's own code, quiet a few hits. Per mentioned video, this may actually improve performance as well. Switch lint to `pedantic`
----
changelog: [`ref_option`]: upgrade lint to `pedantic`
Rollup of 4 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #123932 (restate GlobalAlloc method safety preconditions in terms of what the caller has to do for greater clarity)
- #129003 (Improve Ord docs)
- #130972 (stabilize const_cell_into_inner)
- #130990 (try to get rid of mir::Const::normalize)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
stabilize const_cell_into_inner
This const-stabilizes
- `UnsafeCell::into_inner`
- `Cell::into_inner`
- `RefCell::into_inner`
- `OnceCell::into_inner`
`@rust-lang/wg-const-eval` this uses `rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable(const_precise_live_drops)`, so we'd be comitting to always finding *some* way to accept this code. IMO that's fine -- what these functions do is to move out the only field of a struct, and that struct has no destructor itself. The field's destructor does not get run as it gets returned to the caller.
`@rust-lang/libs-api` this was FCP'd already [years ago](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/78729#issuecomment-811409860), except that `OnceCell::into_inner` was added to the same feature gate since then (Cc `@tgross35).` Does that mean we have to re-run the FCP? If yes, I'd honestly prefer to move `OnceCell` into its own feature gate to not risk missing the next release. (That's why it's not great to add new functions to an already FCP'd feature gate.) OTOH if this needs an FCP either way since the previous FCP was so long ago, then we might as well do it all at once.
Improve Ord docs
- Makes wording more clear and re-structures some sections that can be overwhelming for someone not already in the know.
- Adds examples of how *not* to implement Ord, inspired by various anti-patterns found in real world code.
Many of the wording changes are inspired directly by my personal experience of being confused by the `Ord` docs and seeing other people get it wrong as well, especially lately having looked at a number of `Ord` implementations as part of #128899.
Created with help by `@orlp.`
r? `@workingjubilee`
extend comment in global_llvm_features regarding target-cpu=native
Based on the description in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83084 by `@nagisa` -- seems better to have this in the code, where it is easier to find.
Clarifications for set_nonblocking methods
Closes#129903.
The issue mentions that `send`, `recv` and other operations are interpreted by some users as methods of `TcpSocket` which led to confusion since it hasn't them. To fix it I added "system" into the documentation as being more precise for two reasons:
* it's makes it clear that these names are system operations;
* it doesn't point to the location of these methods like `libc` because not every system is POSIX compatible.
Update `browser-ui-test` version and make use of `wait-for*-false` commands
I added `wait-for*-false` commands, making possible these changes.
r? `@notriddle`
skip old getrandom crate on Solaris
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3924
Now we should be able to enable randomness tests on Solarish (and Android, while we are at it).
Update `catch_unwind` doc comments for `c_unwind`
Updates `catch_unwind` doc comments to indicate that catching a foreign exception _will no longer_ be UB. Instead, there are two possible behaviors, though it is not specified which one an implementation will choose.
Nominated for t-lang to confirm that they are okay with making such a promise based on t-opsem FCP, or whether they would like to be included in the FCP.
Related: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/74990, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/115285, https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1226
