followed by a semicolon.
This allows code like `vec![1i, 2, 3].len();` to work.
This breaks code that uses macros as statements without putting
semicolons after them, such as:
fn main() {
...
assert!(a == b)
assert!(c == d)
println(...);
}
It also breaks code that uses macros as items without semicolons:
local_data_key!(foo)
fn main() {
println("hello world")
}
Add semicolons to fix this code. Those two examples can be fixed as
follows:
fn main() {
...
assert!(a == b);
assert!(c == d);
println(...);
}
local_data_key!(foo);
fn main() {
println("hello world")
}
RFC #378.
Closes#18635.
[breaking-change]
- The following operator traits now take their arguments by value: `Add`, `Sub`, `Mul`, `Div`, `Rem`, `BitAnd`, `BitOr`, `BitXor`, `Shl`, `Shr`. This breaks all existing implementations of these traits.
- The binary operation `a OP b` now "desugars" to `OpTrait::op_method(a, b)` and consumes both arguments.
- `String` and `Vec` addition have been changed to reuse the LHS owned value, and to avoid internal cloning. Only the following asymmetric operations are available: `String + &str` and `Vec<T> + &[T]`, which are now a short-hand for the "append" operation.
[breaking-change]
---
This passes `make check` locally. I haven't touch the unary operators in this PR, but converting them to by value should be very similar to this PR. I can work on them after this gets the thumbs up.
@nikomatsakis r? the compiler changes
@aturon r? the library changes. I think the only controversial bit is the semantic change of the `Vec`/`String` `Add` implementation.
cc #19148
This change makes the compiler no longer infer whether types (structures
and enumerations) implement the `Copy` trait (and thus are implicitly
copyable). Rather, you must implement `Copy` yourself via `impl Copy for
MyType {}`.
A new warning has been added, `missing_copy_implementations`, to warn
you if a non-generic public type has been added that could have
implemented `Copy` but didn't.
For convenience, you may *temporarily* opt out of this behavior by using
`#![feature(opt_out_copy)]`. Note though that this feature gate will never be
accepted and will be removed by the time that 1.0 is released, so you should
transition your code away from using it.
This breaks code like:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
Change this code to:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
impl Copy for Point2D {}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
This is the backwards-incompatible part of #13231.
Part of RFC #3.
[breaking-change]
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/221
The current terminology of "task failure" often causes problems when
writing or speaking about code. You often want to talk about the
possibility of an operation that returns a Result "failing", but cannot
because of the ambiguity with task failure. Instead, you have to speak
of "the failing case" or "when the operation does not succeed" or other
circumlocutions.
Likewise, we use a "Failure" header in rustdoc to describe when
operations may fail the task, but it would often be helpful to separate
out a section describing the "Err-producing" case.
We have been steadily moving away from task failure and toward Result as
an error-handling mechanism, so we should optimize our terminology
accordingly: Result-producing functions should be easy to describe.
To update your code, rename any call to `fail!` to `panic!` instead.
Assuming you have not created your own macro named `panic!`, this
will work on UNIX based systems:
grep -lZR 'fail!' . | xargs -0 -l sed -i -e 's/fail!/panic!/g'
You can of course also do this by hand.
[breaking-change]
Spring cleaning is here! In the Fall! This commit removes quite a large amount
of deprecated functionality from the standard libraries. I tried to ensure that
only old deprecated functionality was removed.
This is removing lots and lots of deprecated features, so this is a breaking
change. Please consult the deprecation messages of the deleted code to see how
to migrate code forward if it still needs migration.
[breaking-change]
This change is an implementation of [RFC 69][rfc] which adds a third kind of
global to the language, `const`. This global is most similar to what the old
`static` was, and if you're unsure about what to use then you should use a
`const`.
The semantics of these three kinds of globals are:
* A `const` does not represent a memory location, but only a value. Constants
are translated as rvalues, which means that their values are directly inlined
at usage location (similar to a #define in C/C++). Constant values are, well,
constant, and can not be modified. Any "modification" is actually a
modification to a local value on the stack rather than the actual constant
itself.
Almost all values are allowed inside constants, whether they have interior
mutability or not. There are a few minor restrictions listed in the RFC, but
they should in general not come up too often.
* A `static` now always represents a memory location (unconditionally). Any
references to the same `static` are actually a reference to the same memory
location. Only values whose types ascribe to `Sync` are allowed in a `static`.
This restriction is in place because many threads may access a `static`
concurrently. Lifting this restriction (and allowing unsafe access) is a
future extension not implemented at this time.
* A `static mut` continues to always represent a memory location. All references
to a `static mut` continue to be `unsafe`.
This is a large breaking change, and many programs will need to be updated
accordingly. A summary of the breaking changes is:
* Statics may no longer be used in patterns. Statics now always represent a
memory location, which can sometimes be modified. To fix code, repurpose the
matched-on-`static` to a `const`.
static FOO: uint = 4;
match n {
FOO => { /* ... */ }
_ => { /* ... */ }
}
change this code to:
const FOO: uint = 4;
match n {
FOO => { /* ... */ }
_ => { /* ... */ }
}
* Statics may no longer refer to other statics by value. Due to statics being
able to change at runtime, allowing them to reference one another could
possibly lead to confusing semantics. If you are in this situation, use a
constant initializer instead. Note, however, that statics may reference other
statics by address, however.
* Statics may no longer be used in constant expressions, such as array lengths.
This is due to the same restrictions as listed above. Use a `const` instead.
[breaking-change]
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/246
The implementation essentially desugars during type collection and AST
type conversion time into the parameter scheme we have now. Only fully
qualified names--e.g. `<T as Foo>::Bar`--are supported.
These `where` clauses are accepted everywhere generics are currently
accepted and desugar during type collection to the type parameter bounds
we have today.
A new keyword, `where`, has been added. Therefore, this is a breaking
change. Change uses of `where` to other identifiers.
[breaking-change]
methods.
This paves the way to associated items by introducing an extra level of
abstraction ("impl-or-trait item") between traits/implementations and
methods. This new abstraction is encoded in the metadata and used
throughout the compiler where appropriate.
There are no functional changes; this is purely a refactoring.
meaning `'b outlives 'a`. Syntax currently does nothing but is needed for full
fix to #5763. To use this syntax, the issue_5763_bootstrap feature guard is
required.
please note the snapshot-waiting unpleasantness. I'm
unable to use the traditional #[cfg(stage0)] mechanism
to swap the new style in for later compiler stages,
because macros invocations in method positions cause
the parser to choke before cfg can strip it out.
Parenthetical note: this problem wouldn't arise with
an interleaved parsing/expansion....
This change propagates to many locations, but because of the
Macro Exterminator (or, more properly, the invariant that it
protects), macro invocations can't occur downstream of expansion.
This means that in librustc and librustdoc, extracting the
desired field can simply assume that it can't be a macro
invocation. Functions in ast_util abstract over this check.
Rationale: for what appear to be historical reasons only, the PatIdent contains
a Path rather than an Ident. This means that there are many places in the code
where an ident is artificially promoted to a path, and---much more problematically---
a bunch of elements from a path are simply thrown away, which seems like an invitation
to some really nasty bugs.
This commit replaces the Path in a PatIdent with a SpannedIdent, which just contains an ident
and a span.
