Feel silly because it's just one thing but it was bothering me that the documentation tells you what you're not going to learn now instead of linking to the item in question. Am total noob pls assist, where is power button. :)
Fixes#20596 by making `Debug` render negative zero with a `-` without affecting the behavior of `Display`.
While I was at it, I also removed some dead code from `float_to_str_bytes_common` (the one from `libcore/fmt/float.rs`, not the function of the same name in `libstd/num/strconv.rs`). It had support for different bases, and for negative numbers, but the function is internal to core and the couple places that call it (all in `libcore/fmt/mod.rs`) never use those features: They pass in `num.abs()` and base 10.
Values for `_SC_*` are not the same value between `macos` and `linux` so I've added specific target constants for Mac OS X and added `_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN` for `linux` and `macos`.
Closes#24374
It looks like `from_vec` was subsumed by new at some point,
but the documentation still refers to it as `from_vec`.
This updates the documentation for `from_vec_unchecked`
so that it properly says that it's the unchecked version of `new`.
Also, from_vec_unchecked requires a actual Vec<u8> while
new can take anything that is Into<Vec<u8>>, so I also
mention that in the documentation.
Since this is documentation:
r? @steveklabnik
- Adds two more functions for broadcast address and special
address classes reserved for documentation
- Modifies the globally routable IP check to include these
new functions
Fixes#24314
It was mistakenly calling `with_extension` with "foo.txt" instead of "txt".
I've also added an assert. This also calls more attention to the fact you get back a PathBuf, instead of a Path, which I feel is easy to miss when skimming.
The meaning of each variant of this enum was somewhat ambiguous and it's uncler
that we wouldn't even want to add more enumeration values in the future. As a
result this error has been altered to instead become an opaque structure.
Learning about the "first invalid byte index" is still an unstable feature, but
the type itself is now stable.
Since it doesn't utilize the parameter, it's not very idiomatic since it
could just use the `Result::or` method. So this changes the example to
utilize the parameter. As far as I can tell, all the numbers in this
example are completely arbitrary.
