Improve wording of "cannot multiply" type error
For example, if you had this code:
fn foo(x: i32, y: f32) -> f32 {
x * y
}
You would get this error:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `f32` to `i32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
However, that's not usually how people describe multiplication. People
usually describe multiplication like how the division error words it:
error[E0277]: cannot divide `i32` by `f32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x / y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 / f32`
|
= help: the trait `Div<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
So that's what this change does. It changes this:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `f32` to `i32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
To this:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `i32` by `f32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
Add Pin::static_ref, static_mut.
This adds `Pin::static_ref` and `Pin::static_mut`, which convert a static reference to a pinned static reference.
Static references are effectively already pinned, as what they refer to has to live forever and can never be moved.
---
Context: I want to update the `sys` and `sys_common` mutexes/rwlocks/condvars to use `Pin<&self>` in their functions, instead of only warning in the unsafety comments that they may not be moved. That should make them a little bit less dangerous to use. Putting such an object in a `static` (e.g. through `sys_common::StaticMutex`) fulfills the requirements about never moving it, but right now there's no safe way to get a `Pin<&T>` to a `static`. This solves that.
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`?
For example, if you had this code:
fn foo(x: i32, y: f32) -> f32 {
x * y
}
You would get this error:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `f32` to `i32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
However, that's not usually how people describe multiplication. People
usually describe multiplication like how the division error words it:
error[E0277]: cannot divide `i32` by `f32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x / y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 / f32`
|
= help: the trait `Div<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
So that's what this change does. It changes this:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `f32` to `i32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
To this:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `i32` by `f32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
Deny broken intra-doc links in linkchecker
Since rustdoc isn't warning about these links, check for them manually.
This also fixes the broken links that popped up from the lint.
Add `str::{Split,RSplit,SplitN,RSplitN,SplitTerminator,RSplitTerminator,SplitInclusive}::as_str` methods
tl;dr this allows viewing unyelded part of str-split-iterators, like so:
```rust
let mut split = "Mary had a little lamb".split(' ');
assert_eq!(split.as_str(), "Mary had a little lamb");
split.next();
assert_eq!(split.as_str(), "had a little lamb");
split.by_ref().for_each(drop);
assert_eq!(split.as_str(), "");
```
--------------
This PR adds semi-identical `as_str` methods to most str-split-iterators with signatures like `&'_ Split<'a, P: Pattern<'a>> -> &'a str` (Note: output `&str` lifetime is bound to the `'a`, not the `'_`). The methods are similar to [`Chars::as_str`]
`SplitInclusive::as_str` is under `"str_split_inclusive_as_str"` feature gate, all other methods are under `"str_split_as_str"` feature gate.
Before this PR you had to sum `len`s of all yielded parts or collect into `String` to emulate `as_str`.
[`Chars::as_str`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/core/str/struct.Chars.html#method.as_str
Replace absolute paths with relative ones
Modern compilers allow reaching external crates
like std or core via relative paths in modules
outside of lib.rs and main.rs.
Stabilize slice_partition_at_index
This stabilizes slice_partition_at_index, including renaming `partition_at_index*` -> `select_nth_unstable*`.
Closes#55300
r? `@Amanieu`
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>
"Some is returned with <some value>" is an awkward construction.
The use of the passive voice is a bit odd, and doesn't seem like the
house style.
So say instead "returns X, wrapped in `Some`", for which there is some
other precedent in stdlib.
Instead of repeating "with the prefix removed", say "after the
prefix". This is a bit clearer that the original is not modified.
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
Allow generic parameters in intra-doc links
Fixes#62834.
---
The contents of the generics will be mostly ignored (except for warning
if fully-qualified syntax is used, which is currently unsupported in
intra-doc links - see issue #74563).
* Allow links like `Vec<T>`, `Result<T, E>`, and `Option<Box<T>>`
* Allow links like `Vec::<T>::new()`
* Warn on
* Unbalanced angle brackets (e.g. `Vec<T` or `Vec<T>>`)
* Missing type to apply generics to (`<T>` or `<Box<T>>`)
* Use of fully-qualified syntax (`<Vec as IntoIterator>::into_iter`)
* Invalid path separator (`Vec:<T>:new`)
* Too many angle brackets (`Vec<<T>>`)
* Empty angle brackets (`Vec<>`)
Note that this implementation *does* allow some constructs that aren't
valid in the actual Rust syntax, for example `Box::<T>new()`. That may
not be supported in rustdoc in the future; it is an implementation
detail.
