Following up on #92964, only add default trait implementations for the
`c-unwind` family of function pointers. The previous attempt in #92964
added trait implementations for many more ABIs and ran into concerns
regarding the increase in size of the libcore rlib.
An attempt to abstract away function pointer types behind a unified
trait to reduce the duplication of trait impls is being discussed in #99531
but this change looks to be blocked on a lang MCP.
Following @RalfJung's suggestion in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99531#issuecomment-1233440142,
this commit is another cut at #92964 but it _only_ adds the impls for
`extern "C-unwind" fn` and `unsafe extern "C-unwind" fn`.
I am interested in landing this patch to unblock the stabilization of
the `c_unwind` feature.
RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2945
Tracking Issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/74990
PR #98165 with commits 7c360dc117 and c1a2db3372
has moved all of the components of these modules into different places,
namely {std,core}::sync and {std,core}::cell. The empty
modules remained. As they are unstable, we can simply remove them.
introduce `{char, u8}::is_ascii_octdigit`
This feature adds two new APIs: `char::is_ascii_octdigit` and `u8::is_ascii_octdigit`, under the feature gate `is_ascii_octdigit`. These methods are shorthands for `char::is_digit(self, 8)` and `u8::is_digit(self, 8)`:
```rust
// core::char
impl char {
pub fn is_ascii_octdigit(self) -> bool;
}
// core::num
impl u8 {
pub fn is_ascii_octdigit(self) -> bool;
}
```
---
Couple of things I need help understanding:
- `const`ness: have I used the right attribute in this case?
- is there a way to run the tests for `core::char` alone, instead of `./x.py test library/core`?
Stabilize `#![feature(mixed_integer_ops)]`
Tracked and FCP completed in #87840.
````@rustbot```` label +T-libs-api +S-waiting-on-review +relnotes
r? rust-lang/t-libs-api
Constify slice.split_at_mut(_unchecked)
Tracking Issue: [Tracking Issue for const_slice_split_at_mut](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/101804)
Feature gate: `#![feature(const_slice_split_at_mut)]`
Still requires const_mut_refs to be actually used, but this feature removes the need to manually re implement these functions in a user crate.
Optimize `array::IntoIter`
`.into_iter()` on arrays was slower than it needed to be (especially compared to slice iterator) since it uses `Range<usize>`, which needs to handle degenerate ranges like `10..4`.
This PR adds an internal `IndexRange` type that's like `Range<usize>` but with a safety invariant that means it doesn't need to worry about those cases -- it only handles `start <= end` -- and thus can give LLVM more information to optimize better.
I added one simple demonstration of the improvement as a codegen test.
(`vec::IntoIter` uses pointers instead of indexes, so doesn't have this problem, but that only works because its elements are boxed. `array::IntoIter` can't use pointers because that would keep it from being movable.)
`.into_iter()` on arrays was slower than it needed to be (especially compared to slice iterator) since it uses `Range<usize>`, which needs to handle degenerate ranges like `10..4`.
This PR adds an internal `IndexRange` type that's like `Range<usize>` but with a safety invariant that means it doesn't need to worry about those cases -- it only handles `start <= end` -- and thus can give LLVM more information to optimize better.
I added one simple demonstration of the improvement as a codegen test.
safe transmute: use `Assume` struct to provide analysis options
This task was left as a TODO in #92268; resolving it brings [`BikeshedIntrinsicFrom`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/core/mem/trait.BikeshedIntrinsicFrom.html) more in line with the API defined in [MCP411](https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/411).
**Before:**
```rust
pub unsafe trait BikeshedIntrinsicFrom<
Src,
Context,
const ASSUME_ALIGNMENT: bool,
const ASSUME_LIFETIMES: bool,
const ASSUME_VALIDITY: bool,
const ASSUME_VISIBILITY: bool,
> where
Src: ?Sized,
{}
```
**After:**
```rust
pub unsafe trait BikeshedIntrinsicFrom<Src, Context, const ASSUME: Assume = { Assume::NOTHING }>
where
Src: ?Sized,
{}
```
`Assume::visibility` has also been renamed to `Assume::safety`, as library safety invariants are what's actually being assumed; visibility is just the mechanism by which it is currently checked (and that may change).
r? `@oli-obk`
---
Related:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/411
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/99571
make slice::{split_at,split_at_unchecked} const functions
Now that `slice::from_raw_parts` is const in stable 1.64, it makes sense to have `split_at` const as well, otherwise unsafe code is required to achieve a const equivalent.
mem::uninitialized: mitigate many incorrect uses of this function
Alternative to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/98966: fill memory with `0x01` rather than leaving it uninit. This is definitely bitewise valid for all `bool` and nonnull types, and also those `Option<&T>` that we started putting `noundef` on. However it is still invalid for `char` and some enums, and on references the `dereferenceable` attribute is still violated, so the generated LLVM IR still has UB -- but in fewer cases, and `dereferenceable` is hopefully less likely to cause problems than clearly incorrect range annotations.
This can make using `mem::uninitialized` a lot slower, but that function has been deprecated for years and we keep telling everyone to move to `MaybeUninit` because it is basically impossible to use `mem::uninitialized` correctly. For the cases where that hasn't helped (and all the old code out there that nobody will ever update), we can at least mitigate the effect of using this API. Note that this is *not* in any way a stable guarantee -- it is still UB to call `mem::uninitialized::<bool>()`, and Miri will call it out as such.
This is somewhat similar to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87032, which proposed to make `uninitialized` return a buffer filled with 0x00. However
- That PR also proposed to reduce the situations in which we panic, which I don't think we should do at this time.
- The 0x01 bit pattern means that nonnull requirements are satisfied, which (due to references) is the most common validity invariant.
`@5225225` I hope I am using `cfg(sanitize)` the right way; I was not sure for which ones to test here.
Cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/66151
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87675
Stabilize `derive_default_enum`
This stabilizes `#![feature(derive_default_enum)]`, as proposed in [RFC 3107](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3107) and tracked in #87517. In short, it permits you to `#[derive(Default)]` on `enum`s, indicating what the default should be by placing a `#[default]` attribute on the desired variant (which must be a unit variant in the interest of forward compatibility).
```````@rustbot``````` label +S-waiting-on-review +T-lang
