The libs-api team agrees to allow const_trait_impl to appear in the
standard library as long as stable code cannot be broken (they are
properly gated) this means if the compiler teams thinks it's okay, then
it's okay.
My priority on constifying would be:
1. Non-generic impls (e.g. Default) or generic impls with no
bounds
2. Generic functions with bounds (that use const impls)
3. Generic impls with bounds
4. Impls for traits with associated types
For people opening constification PRs: please cc me and/or oli-obk.
Stabilize Vec<T>::shrink_to
This PR stabilizes `shrink_to` feature and closes the corresponding issue. The second point was addressed already, and no `panic!` should occur.
Closes#56431.
Recommend `swap_remove` in `Vec::remove` docs
I was able to increase the performance (by 20%!) of my project by changing a `Vec::remove` call to `Vec::swap_remove` in a hot function. I think we should explicitly put a note in the Vec::remove docs to guide people in the right direction so they don't make a similar oversight.
Track caller of Vec::remove()
`vec.remove(invalid)` doesn't print a helpful source position:
> thread 'main' panicked at 'removal index (is 99) should be < len (is 1)', **library/alloc/src/vec/mod.rs:1379:13**
Stabilize `impl From<[(K, V); N]> for HashMap` (and friends)
In addition to allowing HashMap to participate in Into/From conversion, this adds the long-requested ability to use constructor-like syntax for initializing a HashMap:
```rust
let map = HashMap::from([
(1, 2),
(3, 4),
(5, 6)
]);
```
This addition is highly motivated by existing precedence, e.g. it is already possible to similarly construct a Vec from a fixed-size array:
```rust
let vec = Vec::from([1, 2, 3]);
```
...and it is already possible to collect a Vec of tuples into a HashMap (and vice-versa):
```rust
let vec = Vec::from([(1, 2)]);
let map: HashMap<_, _> = vec.into_iter().collect();
let vec: Vec<(_, _)> = map.into_iter().collect();
```
...and of course it is likewise possible to collect a fixed-size array of tuples into a HashMap ([but not vice-versa just yet](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81615)):
```rust
let arr = [(1, 2)];
let map: HashMap<_, _> = std::array::IntoIter::new(arr).collect();
```
Therefore this addition seems like a no-brainer.
As for any impl, this would be insta-stable.
Iterators contain arbitrary code which may panic. Unsafe code has to be
careful to do its state updates at the right point between calls
that may panic.
Mention the `Borrow` guarantee on the `Hash` implementations for Arrays and `Vec`
To remind people like me who forget about it and send PRs to make them different, and to (probably) get a test failure if the code is changed to no longer uphold it.
To remind people like me who forget about it and send PRs to make them different, and to (probably) get a test failure if the code is changed to no longer uphold it.
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/
may not -> might not
may not -> might not
"may not" has two possible meanings:
1. A command: "You may not stay up past your bedtime."
2. A fact that's only sometimes true: "Some cities may not have bike lanes."
In some cases, the meaning is ambiguous: "Some cars may not have snow
tires." (do the cars *happen* to not have snow tires, or is it
physically impossible for them to have snow tires?)
This changes places where the standard library uses the "description of
fact" meaning to say "might not" instead.
This is just `std::vec` for now - if you think this is a good idea I can
convert the rest of the standard library.
"may not" has two possible meanings:
1. A command: "You may not stay up past your bedtime."
2. A fact that's only sometimes true: "Some cities may not have bike lanes."
In some cases, the meaning is ambiguous: "Some cars may not have snow
tires." (do the cars *happen* to not have snow tires, or is it
physically impossible for them to have snow tires?)
This changes places where the standard library uses the "description of
fact" meaning to say "might not" instead.
This is just `std::vec` for now - if you think this is a good idea I can
convert the rest of the standard library.
Vec::dedup_by optimization
Now `Vec::dedup_by` drops items in-place as it goes through them.
From my benchmarks, it is around 10% faster when T is small, with no major regression when otherwise.
I used `ptr::copy` instead of conditional `ptr::copy_nonoverlapping`, because the latter had some weird performance issues on my ryzen laptop (it was 50% slower on it than on intel/sandybridge laptop)
It would be good if someone was able to reproduce these results.
Previously vec's len was updated only after full copy, making the method
leak if T::clone panic!s.
This commit makes `Vec::extend_from_within` (or, more accurately, it's
`T: Clone` specialization) update vec's len on every iteration, fixing
the issue.
`T: Copy` specialization was not affected by the issue b/c it doesn't
call user specified code (as, e.g. `T::clone`), and instead calls
`ptr::copy_nonoverlapping`.
Revert `Vec::spare_capacity_mut` impl to prevent pointers invalidation
The implementation was changed in #79015.
Later it was [pointed out](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81944#issuecomment-782849785) that the implementation invalidates pointers to the buffer (initialized elements) by creating a unique reference to the buffer. This PR reverts the implementation.
r? ```@RalfJung```
Almost all safety comments are of the form `// SAFETY:`,
so normalize the rest and fix a few of them that should
have been a `/// # Safety` section instead.
Furthermore, make `tidy` only allow the uppercase form. While
currently `tidy` only checks `core`, it is a good idea to prevent
`core` from drifting to non-uppercase comments, so that later
we can start checking `alloc` etc. too.
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Improve design of `assert_len`
It was discussed in the [tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76393#issuecomment-761765448) that `assert_len`'s name and usage are confusing. This PR improves them based on a suggestion by ``@scottmcm`` in that issue.
I also improved the documentation to make it clearer when you might want to use this method.
Old example:
```rust
let range = range.assert_len(slice.len());
```
New example:
```rust
let range = range.ensure_subset_of(..slice.len());
```
Fixes#81157
Fix doc test for Vec::retain(), now passes clippy::eval_order_dependence
Doc test for Vec::retain() works correctly but is flagged by clippy::eval_order_dependence. Fix avoids the issue by using an iterator instead of an index.
