slice: Remove some uses of unsafe in first/last chunk methods
Remove unsafe `split_at_unchecked` and `split_at_mut_unchecked` in some slice `split_first_chunk`/`split_last_chunk` methods.
Replace those calls with the safe `split_at` and `split_at_checked` where applicable.
Add codegen tests to check for no panics when calculating the last chunk index using `checked_sub` and `split_at`.
Better viewed with whitespace disabled in diff view
---
The unchecked calls are mostly manual implementations of the safe methods, but with the safety condition negated from `mid <= len` to `len < mid`.
```rust
if self.len() < N {
None
} else {
// SAFETY: We manually verified the bounds of the split.
let (first, tail) = unsafe { self.split_at_unchecked(N) };
// Or for the last_chunk methods
let (init, last) = unsafe { self.split_at_unchecked(self.len() - N) };
```
Unsafe is still needed for the pointer array casts. Their safety comments are unmodified.
Remove mention of `exhaustive_patterns` from `never` docs
The example shows an exhaustive match:
```rust
#![feature(exhaustive_patterns)]
use std::str::FromStr;
let Ok(s) = String::from_str("hello");
```
But https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/119612 moved this functionality to `#![feature(min_exhaustive_patterns)` and then stabilized it.
Switch some rustc_on_unimplemented uses to diagnostic::on_unimplemented
The use on the SliceIndex impl appears unreachable, there is no mention of "vector indices" in any test output and I could not get it to show up in error messages.
Simplify expansion for format_args!().
Instead of calling `Placeholder::new()`, we can just use a struct expression directly.
Before:
```rust
Placeholder::new(…, …, …, …)
```
After:
```rust
Placeholder {
position: …,
flags: …,
width: …,
precision: …,
}
```
(I originally avoided the struct expression, because `Placeholder` had a lot of fields. But now that https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/136974 is merged, it only has four fields left.)
This will make the `fmt` argument to `fmt::Arguments::new_v1_formatted()` a candidate for const promotion, which is important if we ever hope to tackle https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/92698 (It doesn't change anything yet though, because the `args` argument to `fmt::Arguments::new_v1_formatted()` is not const-promotable.)
Remove unsafe `split_at_unchecked` and `split_at_mut_unchecked`
in some slice `split_first_chunk`/`split_last_chunk` methods.
Replace those calls with the safe `split_at` and `split_at_checked` where
applicable.
Add codegen tests to check for no panics when calculating the last
chunk index using `checked_sub` and `split_at`
Instead of calling new(), we can just use a struct expression directly.
Before:
Placeholder::new(…, …, …, …)
After:
Placeholder {
position: …,
flags: …,
width: …,
precision: …,
}
stabilize const_cell
``@rust-lang/libs-api`` ``@rust-lang/wg-const-eval`` I see no reason to wait any longer, so I propose we stabilize the use of `Cell` in `const fn` -- specifically the APIs listed here:
```rust
// core::cell
impl<T> Cell<T> {
pub const fn replace(&self, val: T) -> T;
}
impl<T: Copy> Cell<T> {
pub const fn get(&self) -> T;
}
impl<T: ?Sized> Cell<T> {
pub const fn get_mut(&mut self) -> &mut T;
pub const fn from_mut(t: &mut T) -> &Cell<T>;
}
impl<T> Cell<[T]> {
pub const fn as_slice_of_cells(&self) -> &[Cell<T>];
}
```
Unfortunately, `set` cannot be made `const fn` yet as it drops the old contents.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131283
Override PartialOrd methods for bool
I noticed that `PartialOrd` implementation for `bool` does not override the individual operator methods, unlike the other primitive types like `char` and integers.
This commit extracts these `PartialOrd` overrides shared by the other primitive types into a macro and calls it on `bool` too.
CC `@scottmcm` for our recent adventures in `PartialOrd` land
I noticed that `PartialOrd` implementation for `bool` does not override the
individual operator methods, unlike the other primitive types like `char`
and integers.
This commit extracts these `PartialOrd` overrides shared by the other
primitive types into a macro and calls it on `bool` too.
Simplify `PartialOrd` on tuples containing primitives
We noticed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133984#issuecomment-2704011800 that currently the tuple comparison code, while it [does optimize down](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/codegen/comparison-operators-2-tuple.rs) today, is kinda huge: <https://rust.godbolt.org/z/xqMoeYbhE>
This PR changes the tuple code to go through an overridable "chaining" version of the comparison functions, so that for simple things like `(i16, u16)` and `(f32, f32)` (as seen in the new MIR pre-codegen test) we just directly get the
```rust
if lhs.0 == rhs.0 { lhs.0 OP rhs.0 }
else { lhs.1 OP rhs.1 }
```
version in MIR, rather than emitting a mess for LLVM to have to clean up.
Test added in the first commit, so you can see the MIR diff in the second one.
core: optimize `RepeatN`
...by adding an optimized implementation of `try_fold` and `fold` as well as replacing some unnecessary `mem::replace` calls with `MaybeUninit` helper methods.
...by adding an optimized implementation of `try_fold` and `fold` as well as replacing some unnecessary `mem::replace` calls with `MaybeUninit` helper methods.
