They are replaced with unboxed closures.
cc @pcwalton @aturon
This is a [breaking-change]. Mostly, uses of `proc()` simply need to be converted to `move||` (unboxed closures), but in some cases the adaptations required are more complex (particularly for library authors). A detailed write-up can be found here: http://smallcultfollowing.com/babysteps/blog/2014/11/26/purging-proc/
The commits are ordered to emphasize the more important changes, but are not truly standalone.
Unlike a tuple variant constructor which can be called as a function, a struct variant constructor is not a function, so cannot be called.
If the user tries to assign the constructor to a variable, an ICE occurs, because there is no way to use it later. So we should stop the constructor from being used like that.
A similar mechanism already exists for a normal struct, as it prohibits a struct from being resolved. This commit does the same for a struct variant.
This commit also includes some changes to the existing tests.
Fixes#19452.
in most cases, just the error message changed, but in some cases we
are reporting new errors that OUGHT to have been reported before but
we're overlooked (mostly involving the `'static` bound on `Send`).
This pull request tries to fix#19340, which states two ICE cases related to enum struct variants.
It is my first attempt to fix the compiler. I found this solution by trial and error, so the method used to fix the issue looks very hacky. Please review it, and direct me to find a better solution.
I'm also to add test cases. Where should I put them? Maybe `src/test/run-pass/issue-19340.rs`?
Unlike a tuple variant constructor which can be called as a function, a
struct variant constructor is not a function, so cannot be called.
If the user tries to assign the constructor to a variable, an ICE
occurs, because there is no way to use it later. So we should stop the
constructor from being used like that.
A similar mechanism already exists for a normal struct, as it prohibits
a struct from being resolved. This commit does the same for a struct
variant.
This commit also includes some changes to the existing tests.
Fixes#19452.
This is particularly important for deeply nested types, which generate deeply nested impls. This is a fix for #19318. It's possible we could also improve this particular case not to increment the recursion count, but it's worth being able to adjust the recursion limit anyhow.
cc @jdm
r? @pcwalton
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]
Now that we have an overloaded comparison (`==`) operator, and that `Vec`/`String` deref to `[T]`/`str` on method calls, many `as_slice()`/`as_mut_slice()`/`to_string()` calls have become redundant. This patch removes them. These were the most common patterns:
- `assert_eq(test_output.as_slice(), "ground truth")` -> `assert_eq(test_output, "ground truth")`
- `assert_eq(test_output, "ground truth".to_string())` -> `assert_eq(test_output, "ground truth")`
- `vec.as_mut_slice().sort()` -> `vec.sort()`
- `vec.as_slice().slice(from, to)` -> `vec.slice(from_to)`
---
Note that e.g. `a_string.push_str(b_string.as_slice())` has been left untouched in this PR, since we first need to settle down whether we want to favor the `&*b_string` or the `b_string[]` notation.
This is rebased on top of #19167
cc @alexcrichton @aturon
Comparison traits have gained an `Rhs` input parameter that defaults to `Self`. And now the comparison operators can be overloaded to work between different types. In particular, this PR allows the following operations (and their commutative versions):
- `&str` == `String` == `CowString`
- `&[A]` == `&mut [B]` == `Vec<C>` == `CowVec<D>` == `[E, ..N]` (for `N` up to 32)
- `&mut A` == `&B` (for `Sized` `A` and `B`)
Where `A`, `B`, `C`, `D`, `E` may be different types that implement `PartialEq`. For example, these comparisons are now valid: `string == "foo"`, and `vec_of_strings == ["Hello", "world"]`.
[breaking-change]s
Since the `==` may now work on different types, operations that relied on the old "same type restriction" to drive type inference, will need to be type annotated. These are the most common fallout cases:
- `some_vec == some_iter.collect()`: `collect` needs to be type annotated: `collect::<Vec<_>>()`
- `slice == &[a, b, c]`: RHS doesn't get coerced to an slice, use an array instead `[a, b, c]`
- `lhs == []`: Change expression to `lhs.is_empty()`
- `lhs == some_generic_function()`: Type annotate the RHS as necessary
cc #19148
r? @aturon
