Rust contains various size checks conditional on target_arch = "x86_64",
but these checks were never intended to apply to
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnux32. Add target_pointer_width = "64" to the
conditions.
I don't think the boxing helped performance, in fact I think it
potentially made it worse. The data was still being copied, but now it
was through a pointer. Thinking about it more, I think boxing might only
help when you're passing a big object around by value all the time,
rather than the slowdown being that you're cloning it.
There was no need to clone `id_map` because it was reset before each
item was rendered. `deref_id_map` was not reset, but it was keyed by
`DefId` and thus was unlikely to have collisions (at least for now).
Now we just clone the fields that need to be cloned, and instead create
fresh versions of the others.
All the tests passed, so it doesn't seem they need to be shared.
Plus they should be item/page-specific.
I'm not sure why they were shared before. I think the reason `id_map`
worked as a shared value before is that it is cleared before rendering
each item (in `render_item`). And then I'm guessing `deref_id_map`
worked because it's a hashmap keyed by `DefId`, so there was no overlap
(though I'm guessing we could have had issues in the future).
Note that `id_map` currently still has to be cleared because otherwise
child items would inherit the `id_map` of their parent. I'm hoping to
figure out a way to stop cloning `Context`, but until then we have to
reset `id_map`.
It doesn't look like it's shared across threads, so it doesn't need to
be thread-safe. Of course, since we're using Rust, we'll get an error if
we try to share it across threads, so this should be safe :)
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #80845 (Make ItemKind::ExternCrate looks like hir::ItemKind::ExternCrate to make transition over hir::ItemKind simpler)
- #82708 (Warn on `#![doc(test(...))]` on items other than the crate root and use future incompatible lint)
- #82714 (Detect match arm body without braces)
- #82736 (Bump optimization from mir_opt_level 2 to 3 and 3 to 4 and make "release" be level 2 by default)
- #82782 (Make rustc shim's verbose output include crate_name being compiled.)
- #82797 (Update tests names to start with `issue-`)
- #82809 (rustdoc: Use substrings instead of split to grab enum variant paths)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
lintcheck: add --fix mode which tries to apply lint suggestions to th…
…e sources and prints a warning if that fails
Great for spotting false positives/broken suggestions of applicable lints.
There are false positives though because I'm not sure yet how to silence rustc warnings while keeping clippy warnings.
Sometimes rustc makes a suggestion that fails to apply and the implementation does not differentiate between clippy and rustc warnings when applying lint suggestions.
changelog: none
rustdoc: Use substrings instead of split to grab enum variant paths
Both versions are about equally readable, but this version avoids scanning the entire path and building an intermediate array (`split()` in Rust is a lazy iterator, but not in JavaScript).
Make rustc shim's verbose output include crate_name being compiled.
This change is mainly motivated by an issue with the environment printing I added in PR 82403: multiple rustc invocations progress in parallel, and the environment output, spanning multiple lines, gets interleaved in ways make it difficult to extra the enviroment settings.
(This aforementioned difficulty is more of a hiccup than an outright show-stopper, because the environment variables tend to be the same for all of the rustc invocations, so it doesn't matter too much if one mixes up which lines one is looking at. But still: Better to fix it.)
Warn on `#![doc(test(...))]` on items other than the crate root and use future incompatible lint
Part of #82672.
This PR does multiple things:
* Create a new `INVALID_DOC_ATTRIBUTE` lint which is also "future incompatible", allowing us to use it as a warning for the moment until it turns (eventually) into a hard error.
* Use this link when `#![doc(test(...))]` isn't used at the crate level.
* Make #82702 use this new lint as well.
r? ``@jyn514``
Make ItemKind::ExternCrate looks like hir::ItemKind::ExternCrate to make transition over hir::ItemKind simpler
It was surprisingly difficult to make this change, mostly because of two issues:
* We now store the `ExternCrate` name in the parent struct (`clean::Item`), which forced me to modify the json conversion code a bit more than expected.
* The second problem was that, since we now have a `Some(name)`, it was trying to render it, ending up in a panic because we ended up in a `unreachable` statement. The solution was simply to add `!item.is_extern_crate()` in `formats::renderer` before calling `cx.item(item, &cache)?;`.
I'll continue to replace all the `clean::ItemKind` variants one by one until it looks exactly like `hir::ItemKind`. Then we'll simply discard the rustdoc type. Once this done, we'll be able to discard `clean::Item` too to use `hir::Item`.
r? ``@jyn514``
When rustdoc lints were changed to be tool lints, the `rustdoc` group
was removed, leading to spurious warnings like
```
warning: unknown lint: `rustdoc`
```
The lint group still worked when rustdoc ran, since rustdoc added the group itself.
This renames the group to `rustdoc::all` for consistency with
`clippy::all` and the rest of the rustdoc lints.
Improve slice.binary_search_by()'s best-case performance to O(1)
This PR aimed to improve the [slice.binary_search_by()](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.slice.html#method.binary_search_by)'s best-case performance to O(1).
# Noticed
I don't know why the docs of `binary_search_by` said `"If there are multiple matches, then any one of the matches could be returned."`, but the implementation isn't the same thing. Actually, it returns the **last one** if multiple matches found.
Then we got two options:
## If returns the last one is the correct or desired result
Then I can rectify the docs and revert my changes.
## If the docs are correct or desired result
Then my changes can be merged after fully reviewed.
However, if my PR gets merged, another issue raised: this could be a **breaking change** since if multiple matches found, the returning order no longer the last one instead of it could be any one.
For example:
```rust
let mut s = vec![0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55];
let num = 1;
let idx = s.binary_search(&num);
s.insert(idx, 2);
// Old implementations
assert_eq!(s, [0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 42, 55]);
// New implementations
assert_eq!(s, [0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 42, 55]);
```
# Benchmarking
**Old implementations**
```sh
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 76 ns/iter (+/- 5)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 77 ns/iter (+/- 17)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 183 ns/iter (+/- 23)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 185 ns/iter (+/- 19)
```
**New implementations (1)**
Implemented by this PR.
```rust
if cmp == Equal {
return Ok(mid);
} else if cmp == Less {
base = mid
}
```
```sh
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 58 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 37 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 76 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 6)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 200 ns/iter (+/- 30)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 157 ns/iter (+/- 6)
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 8)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 37 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 77 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 198 ns/iter (+/- 21)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 158 ns/iter (+/- 11)
```
**New implementations (2)**
Suggested by `@nbdd0121` in [comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74024#issuecomment-665430239).
```rust
base = if cmp == Greater { base } else { mid };
if cmp == Equal { break }
```
```sh
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 7)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 37 ns/iter (+/- 5)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 75 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 56 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 195 ns/iter (+/- 15)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 151 ns/iter (+/- 7)
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 38 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 77 ns/iter (+/- 11)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 194 ns/iter (+/- 15)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 151 ns/iter (+/- 18)
```
I run some benchmarking testings against on two implementations. The new implementation has a lot of improvement in duplicates cases, while in `binary_search_l3` case, it's a little bit slower than the old one.
