As with last time (where I marked .woff files as binary so that git does
not perform newline normalization), it's unclear how it got corrupted in
the first place.
- The signature of the `*_equiv` methods of `HashMap` and similar structures
have changed, and now require one less level of indirection. Change your code
from:
```
hashmap.find_equiv(&"Hello");
hashmap.find_equiv(&&[0u8, 1, 2]);
```
to:
```
hashmap.find_equiv("Hello");
hashmap.find_equiv(&[0u8, 1, 2]);
```
- The generic parameter `T` of the `Hasher::hash<T>` method have become
`Sized?`. Downstream code must add `Sized?` to that method in their
implementations. For example:
```
impl Hasher<FnvState> for FnvHasher {
fn hash<T: Hash<FnvState>>(&self, t: &T) -> u64 { /* .. */ }
}
```
must be changed to:
```
impl Hasher<FnvState> for FnvHasher {
fn hash<Sized? T: Hash<FnvState>>(&self, t: &T) -> u64 { /* .. */ }
// ^^^^^^
}
```
[breaking-change]
This common representation for delimeters should make pattern matching easier. Having a separate `token::DelimToken` enum also allows us to enforce the invariant that the opening and closing delimiters must be the same in `ast::TtDelimited`, removing the need to ensure matched delimiters when working with token trees.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/221
The current terminology of "task failure" often causes problems when
writing or speaking about code. You often want to talk about the
possibility of an operation that returns a Result "failing", but cannot
because of the ambiguity with task failure. Instead, you have to speak
of "the failing case" or "when the operation does not succeed" or other
circumlocutions.
Likewise, we use a "Failure" header in rustdoc to describe when
operations may fail the task, but it would often be helpful to separate
out a section describing the "Err-producing" case.
We have been steadily moving away from task failure and toward Result as
an error-handling mechanism, so we should optimize our terminology
accordingly: Result-producing functions should be easy to describe.
To update your code, rename any call to `fail!` to `panic!` instead.
Assuming you have not created your own macro named `panic!`, this
will work on UNIX based systems:
grep -lZR 'fail!' . | xargs -0 -l sed -i -e 's/fail!/panic!/g'
You can of course also do this by hand.
[breaking-change]
Spring cleaning is here! In the Fall! This commit removes quite a large amount
of deprecated functionality from the standard libraries. I tried to ensure that
only old deprecated functionality was removed.
This is removing lots and lots of deprecated features, so this is a breaking
change. Please consult the deprecation messages of the deleted code to see how
to migrate code forward if it still needs migration.
[breaking-change]
AsciiStr::to_lower is now AsciiStr::to_lowercase and AsciiStr::to_upper is AsciiStr::to_uppercase to match Ascii trait.
Part of issue #17790.
This is my first pull request so let me know if anything is incorrect.
Thanks!
[breaking-changes]
1. A slice of parametrized type, say
BorrowedRef { ... Vector(Generic(T)) }, is rendered as
"<a href='primitive.slice.html'>&[T]</a>"
2. A slice of other types, say
BorrowedRef { ... Vector(int) }, is rendered as
"<a href='primitive.slice.html'>&[</a>
<a href='primitive.int.html'>int</a>
<a href='primitive.slice.html'>]</a>"
3. Other cases, say BorrowedRef { ... int }, are
rendered as same as before:
"&<a href='primitive.int.html'>int</a>"
Relevant W3C specs:
- http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/links.html#h-12.2.2
12.2.2 Nested links are illegal
- http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/text-level-semantics.html#the-a-element
states A tag must not enclose any "interactive contents"
which include A tags themselves.
This PR adds support in rustdoc for properly naming lifetimes in bounds, instead of just showing `'static` for everything. It also adds support for unboxed function sugar bounds, which were also previously rendered as `'static`.
Previously, external code might call `markdown::render()` without having
called `markdown::reset_headers()`, meaning the TLS key
`used_header_map` was unset. Now `markdown::render()` ensures that
`used_header_map` is set by calling `reset_headers` if necessary.
Fix#17736
Previously, external code might call `markdown::render()` without having
called `markdown::reset_headers()`, meaning the TLS key
`used_header_map` was unset. Now `markdown::render()` ensures that
`used_header_map` is set by calling `reset_headers` if necessary.
Fix#17736
Fixes that unit-like structs cannot be used if they are re-exported and used in another crate. (ICE)
The relevant changes are in `rustc::metadata::{decoder, encoder}` and `rustc::middle::ty`.
A test case is included.
The problem is that the expressoin `UnitStruct` is an `ExprPath` to an `DefFn`, which is of expr kind `RvalueDatumExpr`, but for unit-struct ctors the expr kind should be `RvalueDpsExpr`. I fixed this (in a I guess clean way) by introducing `CtorFn` in the metadata and including a `is_ctor` flag in `DefFn`.
Fixes that unit-like structs cannot be used if they are reexported and
used in another crate. The compiler fails with an ICE, because unit-like
structs are exported as DefFn and the expression `UnitStruct` is
interpreted as function pointer instead of a call to the constructor.
To resolve this ambiguity tuple-like struct constructors are now exported
as CtorFn. When `rustc::metadata::decoder` finds a CtorFn it sets a new
flag `is_ctor` in DefFn to true.
Relevant changes are in `rustc::metadata::{encoder, decoder}` and in
`rustc::middle::ty`.
Closes#12660 and #16973.
This is the bare minimum to stop using split stacks on Windows, fixing https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/13259 and #14742, by turning on stack probes for all functions and disabling compiler and runtime support for split stacks on Windows.
It does not restore the out-of-stack error message, which requires more runtime work.
This includes a test that the Windows TCB is no longer being clobbered, but the out-of-stack test itself is pretty weak, only testing that the program exits abnormally, not that it isn't writing to bogus memory, so I haven't truly verified that this is providing the safety we claim.
A more complete solution is in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/16388, which has some unresolved issues yet.
cc @Zoxc @klutzy @vadimcn
