The return of the GroupBy and GroupByMut iterators on slice
According to https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2477#issuecomment-742034372, I am opening this PR again, this time I implemented it in safe Rust only, it is therefore much easier to read and is completely safe.
This PR proposes to add two new methods to the slice, the `group_by` and `group_by_mut`. These two methods provide a way to iterate over non-overlapping sub-slices of a base slice that are separated by the predicate given by the user (e.g. `Partial::eq`, `|a, b| a.abs() < b.abs()`).
```rust
let slice = &[1, 1, 1, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2];
let mut iter = slice.group_by(|a, b| a == b);
assert_eq!(iter.next(), Some(&[1, 1, 1][..]));
assert_eq!(iter.next(), Some(&[3, 3][..]));
assert_eq!(iter.next(), Some(&[2, 2, 2][..]));
assert_eq!(iter.next(), None);
```
[An RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2477) was open 2 years ago but wasn't necessary.
Document unsafety in core::slice::memchr
Contributes to #66219
Note sure if that's good enough, especially for the `align_to` call.
The docs only mention transmuting and I don't think that everything related to reference lifetimes and state validity mentioned in the [nomicon](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/transmutes.html) are relevant here.
More consistently use spaces after commas in lists in docs
This PR changes instances of lists that didn't use spaces after commas, like `vec![1,2,3]`, to `vec![1, 2, 3]` to be more consistent with idiomatic Rust style (the way these were looks strange to me, especially because there are often lists that *do* use spaces after the commas later in the same code block 😬).
I noticed one of these in an example in the stdlib docs and went looking for more, but as far as I can see, I'm only changing those spots in user-facing documentation or rustc output, and the changes make no semantic difference.
Improve documentation for slice strip_* functions
Prompted by the stabilisation tracking issue #73413 I looked at the docs for `strip_prefix` and `strip_suffix` for both `str` and `slice`, and I felt they could be slightly improved.
Thanks for your attention.
Add [T]::as_chunks(_mut)
Allows getting the slices directly, rather than just through an iterator as in `array_chunks(_mut)`. The constructors for those iterators are then written in terms of these methods, so the iterator constructors no longer have any `unsafe` of their own.
Unstable, of course. #74985
replace `#[allow_internal_unstable]` with `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable]` for `const fn`s
`#[allow_internal_unstable]` is currently used to side-step feature gate and stability checks.
While it was originally only meant to be used only on macros, its use was expanded to `const fn`s.
This pr adds stricter checks for the usage of `#[allow_internal_unstable]` (only on macros) and introduces the `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable]` attribute for usage on `const fn`s.
This pr does not change any of the functionality associated with the use of `#[allow_internal_unstable]` on macros or the usage of `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable]` (instead of `#[allow_internal_unstable]`) on `const fn`s (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69399#issuecomment-712911540).
Note: The check for `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable]` currently only validates that the attribute is used on a function, because I don't know how I would check if the function is a `const fn` at the place of the check. I therefore openend this as a 'draft pull request'.
Closesrust-lang/rust#69399
r? @oli-obk
Check for exhaustion in RangeInclusive::contains and slicing
When a range has finished iteration, `is_empty` returns true, so it
should also be the case that `contains` returns false.
Fixes#77941.
Doc formating consistency between slice sort and sort_unstable, and big O notation consistency
Updated documentation for slice sorting methods to be consistent between stable and unstable versions, which just ended up being minor formatting differences.
I also went through and updated any doc comments with big O notation to be consistent with #74010 by italicizing them rather than having them in a code block.
Move `slice::check_range` to `RangeBounds`
Since this method doesn't take a slice anymore (#76662), it makes more sense to define it on `RangeBounds`.
Questions:
- Should the new method be `assert_len` or `assert_length`?
The stabilisation issue, #73413, has an open item for documentation.
I looked at the docs and it is all there, but I felt it could do with
some minor wording improvement.
I looked at the `str::strip_prefix` docs for a template. (That
resulted in me slightly changing that doc too.)
I de-linkified `None` and `Some`, as I felt that rather noisy.. I
searched stdlib, and these don't seem to be usually linkified.
Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
This stabilizes the functionality in slice_partition_at_index,
but under the names `select_nth_unstable*`. The functions
`partition_at_index*` are left as deprecated, to be removed in
a later release.
Closes#55300
