Document that `assert!` format arguments are evaluated lazily
It can be useful to do some computation in `assert!` format arguments, in order to get better error messages. For example:
```rust
assert!(
some_condition,
"The state is invalid. Details: {}",
expensive_call_to_get_debugging_info(),
);
```
It seems like `assert!` only evaluates the format arguments if the assertion fails, which is useful but doesn't appear to be documented anywhere. This PR documents the behavior and adds some tests.
To digit simplification
I found out the other day that all the ascii digits have the first four bits as one would hope them to. (Eg. char `2` ends `0b0010`). There are two bits to indicate it's in the digit range ( `0b0011_0000`). If it is a true digit then all the higher bits aside from these two will be 0 (as ascii is the lowest part of the unicode u32 spectrum). So XORing with `0b11_0000` should mean we either get the number 0-9 or alternativly we get a larger number in the u32 space. If we get something that's not 0-9 then it will be discarded as it will be greater than the radix.
The code seems so fast though that there's quite a lot of noise in the benchmarks so it's not that easy to prove conclusively that it's faster as well as less instructions.
The non-fast path I was toying with as well wondering if we could do this as then we'd only have one return and less instructions still:
```
match self {
'a'..='z' => self as u32 - 'a' as u32 + 10,
'A'..='Z' => self as u32 - 'A' as u32 + 10,
_ => { radix = 10; self as u32 ^ ASCII_DIGIT_MASK},
}
```
Here's the [godbolt](https://godbolt.org/z/883c9n).
( H/T to ``@byteshadow`` for pointing out xor was what I needed)
It can be useful to do some computation in `assert!` format arguments, in order to get better error messages. For example:
```rust
assert!(
some_condition,
"The state is invalid. Details: {}",
expensive_call_to_get_debugging_info(),
);
```
It seems like `assert!` only evaluates the format arguments if the assertion fails, which is useful but doesn't appear to be documented anywhere. This PR documents the behavior and adds some tests.
The former `chain`+`chain`+`fold` implementation looked nice from a
functional-programming perspective, but it introduced unnecessary layers
of abstraction on every `flat_map`/`flatten` fold. It's straightforward
to just fold each part in turn, and this makes it look like a simplified
version of the existing `try_fold` implementation.
For the `iter::bench_flat_map*` benchmarks, I get a large improvement in
`bench_flat_map_chain_sum`, from 1,598,473 ns/iter to 499,889 ns/iter,
and the rest are unchanged.
This does not suggest adding such a function to the public API. This is
just for the purpose of avoiding duplicate code. Many array methods
already contained the same kind of code and there are still many array
related methods to come (e.g. `Iterator::{chunks, map_windows, next_n,
...}`) which all basically need this functionality. Writing custom
`unsafe` code for each of those seems not like a good idea.
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.
The use of module-level functions instead of associated functions
on `<*const T>` or `<*mut T>` follows the precedent of
`ptr::slice_from_raw_parts` and `ptr::slice_from_raw_parts_mut`.
