Fix trailing space showing up in example
The current text is rendered as: U+005B ..= U+0060 ``[ \ ] ^ _ ` ``, or (**note the final space!**)
This patch changes that to render as: U+005B ..= U+0060 `` [ \ ] ^ _ ` ``, or (**note no final space!**)
The reason for that, is that CommonMark has a solution for starting or ending inline code with a backtick/grave accent: padding both sides with a space, makes that padding disappear.
Expose `Utf8Lossy` as `Utf8Chunks`
This PR changes the feature for `Utf8Lossy` from `str_internals` to `utf8_lossy` and improves the API. This is done to eventually expose the API as stable.
Proposal: rust-lang/libs-team#54
Tracking Issue: #99543
Refactor iteration logic in the `Flatten` and `FlatMap` iterators
The `Flatten` and `FlatMap` iterators both delegate to `FlattenCompat`:
```rust
struct FlattenCompat<I, U> {
iter: Fuse<I>,
frontiter: Option<U>,
backiter: Option<U>,
}
```
Every individual iterator method that `FlattenCompat` implements needs to carefully manage this state, checking whether the `frontiter` and `backiter` are present, and storing the current iterator appropriately if iteration is aborted. This has led to methods such as `next`, `advance_by`, and `try_fold` all having similar code for managing the iterator's state.
I have extracted this common logic of iterating the inner iterators with the option to exit early into a `iter_try_fold` method:
```rust
impl<I, U> FlattenCompat<I, U>
where
I: Iterator<Item: IntoIterator<IntoIter = U>>,
{
fn iter_try_fold<Acc, Fold, R>(&mut self, acc: Acc, fold: Fold) -> R
where
Fold: FnMut(Acc, &mut U) -> R,
R: Try<Output = Acc>,
{ ... }
}
```
It passes each of the inner iterators to the given function as long as it keep succeeding. It takes care of managing `FlattenCompat`'s state, so that the actual `Iterator` methods don't need to. The resulting code that makes use of this abstraction is much more straightforward:
```rust
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<U::Item> {
#[inline]
fn next<U: Iterator>((): (), iter: &mut U) -> ControlFlow<U::Item> {
match iter.next() {
None => ControlFlow::CONTINUE,
Some(x) => ControlFlow::Break(x),
}
}
self.iter_try_fold((), next).break_value()
}
```
Note that despite being implemented in terms of `iter_try_fold`, `next` is still able to benefit from `U`'s `next` method. It therefore does not take the performance hit that implementing `next` directly in terms of `Self::try_fold` causes (in some benchmarks).
This PR also adds `iter_try_rfold` which captures the shared logic of `try_rfold` and `advance_back_by`, as well as `iter_fold` and `iter_rfold` for folding without early exits (used by `fold`, `rfold`, `count`, and `last`).
Benchmark results:
```
before after
bench_flat_map_sum 423,255 ns/iter 414,338 ns/iter
bench_flat_map_ref_sum 1,942,139 ns/iter 2,216,643 ns/iter
bench_flat_map_chain_sum 1,616,840 ns/iter 1,246,445 ns/iter
bench_flat_map_chain_ref_sum 4,348,110 ns/iter 3,574,775 ns/iter
bench_flat_map_chain_option_sum 780,037 ns/iter 780,679 ns/iter
bench_flat_map_chain_option_ref_sum 2,056,458 ns/iter 834,932 ns/iter
```
I added the last two benchmarks specifically to demonstrate an extreme case where `FlatMap::next` can benefit from custom internal iteration of the outer iterator, so take it with a grain of salt. We should probably do a perf run to see if the changes to `next` are worth it in practice.
I noticed in the MIR for <https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=release&edition=2021&gist=67097e0494363ee27421a4e3bdfaf513> that it's inlined most stuff
```
scope 5 (inlined <Result<i32, u32> as Try>::branch)
```
```
scope 8 (inlined <Result<i32, u32> as Try>::from_output)
```
But yet the do-nothing `from` call was still there:
```
_17 = <u32 as From<u32>>::from(move _18) -> bb9;
```
So let's give this a try and see what perf has to say.
Don't derive `PartialEq::ne`.
Currently we skip deriving `PartialEq::ne` for C-like (fieldless) enums
and empty structs, thus reyling on the default `ne`. This behaviour is
unnecessarily conservative, because the `PartialEq` docs say this:
> Implementations must ensure that eq and ne are consistent with each other:
>
> `a != b` if and only if `!(a == b)` (ensured by the default
> implementation).
This means that the default implementation (`!(a == b)`) is always good
enough. So this commit changes things such that `ne` is never derived.
The motivation for this change is that not deriving `ne` reduces compile
times and binary sizes.
Observable behaviour may change if a user has defined a type `A` with an
inconsistent `PartialEq` and then defines a type `B` that contains an
`A` and also derives `PartialEq`. Such code is already buggy and
preserving bug-for-bug compatibility isn't necessary.
Two side-effects of the change:
- There is only one error message produced for types where `PartialEq`
cannot be derived, instead of two.
- For coverage reports, some warnings about generated `ne` methods not
being executed have disappeared.
Both side-effects seem fine, and possibly preferable.
Simple Clamp Function
I thought this was more robust and easier to read. I also allowed this function to return early in order to skip the extra bound check (I'm sure the difference is negligible). I'm not sure if there was a reason for binding `self` to `x`; if so, please correct me.
Simple Clamp Function for f64
I thought this was more robust and easier to read. I also allowed this function to return early in order to skip the extra bound check (I'm sure the difference is negligible). I'm not sure if there was a reason for binding `self` to `x`; if so, please correct me.
Floating point clamp test
f32 clamp using mut self
f64 clamp using mut self
Update library/core/src/num/f32.rs
Update f64.rs
Update x86_64-floating-point-clamp.rs
Update src/test/assembly/x86_64-floating-point-clamp.rs
Update x86_64-floating-point-clamp.rs
Co-Authored-By: scottmcm <scottmcm@users.noreply.github.com>
Update the minimum external LLVM to 13
With this change, we'll have stable support for LLVM 13 through 15 (pending release).
For reference, the previous increase to LLVM 12 was #90175.
r? `@nagisa`
The current text is rendered as: U+005B ..= U+0060 ``[ \ ] ^ _ ` ``, or.
This patch changes that to render as: U+005B ..= U+0060 `` [ \ ] ^ _ ` ``, or
The reason for that, is that CommonMark has a solution for starting or ending inline code with a backtick/grave accent: padding both sides with a space, makes that padding disappear.
Add `Iterator::array_chunks` (take N+1)
A revival of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/92393.
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
cc `@rossmacarthur` `@scottmcm` `@the8472`
I've tried to address most of the review comments on the previous attempt. The only thing I didn't address is `try_fold` implementation, I've left the "custom" one for now, not sure what exactly should it use.
make raw_eq precondition more restrictive
Specifically, don't allow comparing pointers that way. Comparing pointers is subtle because you have to talk about what happens to the provenance.
This matches what [Miri already implements](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=9eb1dfb8a61b5a2d4a7cee43df2717af), and all existing users are fine with this.
If raw_eq on pointers is ever desired, we can adjust the intrinsic spec and Miri implementation as needed, but for now that seems just unnecessary. Also, this is a const intrinsic, and in const, comparing pointers this way is *not possible* -- so if we allow the intrinsic to compare pointers in general, we need to impose an extra restrictions saying that in const-context, pointers are *not* okay.
Reoptimize layout array
This way it's one check instead of two, so hopefully (cc #99117) it'll be simpler for rustc perf too 🤞
Quick demonstration:
```rust
pub fn demo(n: usize) -> Option<Layout> {
Layout::array::<i32>(n).ok()
}
```
Nightly: <https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=release&edition=2021&gist=e97bf33508aa03f38968101cdeb5322d>
```nasm
mov rax, rdi
mov ecx, 4
mul rcx
seto cl
movabs rdx, 9223372036854775805
xor esi, esi
cmp rax, rdx
setb sil
shl rsi, 2
xor edx, edx
test cl, cl
cmove rdx, rsi
ret
```
This PR (note no `mul`, in addition to being much shorter):
```nasm
xor edx, edx
lea rax, [4*rcx]
shr rcx, 61
sete dl
shl rdx, 2
ret
```
This is built atop `@CAD97` 's #99136; the new changes are cb8aba66ef6a0e17f08a0574e4820653e31b45a0.
I added a bunch more tests for `Layout::from_size_align` and `Layout::array` too.
Inline CStr::from_bytes_with_nul_unchecked::rt_impl
Currently `CStr::from_bytes_with_nul_unchecked::rt_impl` is not being inlined. The following function:
```rust
pub unsafe fn from_bytes_with_nul_unchecked(bytes: &[u8]) {
CStr::from_bytes_with_nul_unchecked(bytes);
}
```
Outputs the following assembly on current nightly
```asm
example::from_bytes_with_nul_unchecked:
jmp qword ptr [rip + _ZN4core3ffi5c_str4CStr29from_bytes_with_nul_unchecked7rt_impl17h026f29f3d6a41333E@GOTPCREL]
```
Meanwhile on beta this provides the following assembly:
```asm
example::from_bytes_with_nul_unchecked:
ret
```
This pull request adds `#[inline]` annotation to`rt_impl` to fix a code generation regression for `CStr::from_bytes_with_nul_unchecked`.
docs: remove repetition in `is_numeric` function docs
In https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99628 we introduce new docs for the `is_numeric` function, and this is a follow-up PR that removes some unnecessary repetition that may be introduced by some rebasing.
`@rustbot` r? `@joshtriplett`
