Implement nth_back for slice::{Iter, IterMut}
Part of #54054.
I implemented `nth_back` as straightforwardly as I could, and then slightly changed `nth` to match `nth_back`. I believe I did so correctly, but please double-check 🙂
I also added the helper methods `zst_shrink`, `next_unchecked`, and `next_back_unchecked` to get rid of some duplicated code. These changes hopefully make this code easier to understand for new contributors like me.
I noticed the `is_empty!` and `len!` macros which sole purpose seems to be inlining, according to the comment right above them, but the `is_empty` and `len` methods are already marked with `#[inline(always)]`. Does that mean we could replace these macros with method calls, without affecting anything? I'd love to get rid of them.
macos tlv workaround
fixes: #60141
Includes:
* remove dead code: `requires_move_before_drop`. This hasn't been needed for a while now (oops I should have removed it in #57655)
* redox had a copy of `fast::Key` (not sure why?). That has been removed.
* Perform a `read_volatile` on OSX to reduce `tlv_get_addr` calls per `__getit` from (4-2 depending on context) to 1.
`tlv_get_addr` is relatively expensive (~1.5ns on my machine).
Previously, in contexts where `__getit` was inlined, 4 calls to `tlv_get_addr` were performed per lookup. For some reason when `__getit` is not inlined this is reduced to 2x - and performance improves to match.
After this PR, I have only ever seen 1x call to `tlv_get_addr` per `__getit`, and macos now benefits from situations where `__getit` is inlined.
I'm not sure if the `read_volatile(&&__KEY)` trick is working around an LLVM bug, or a rustc bug, or neither.
r? @alexcrichton
Support `cfg` and `cfg_attr` on generic parameters
`cfg` attributes are supported in all other positions where attributes are accepted at all.
They were previously prohibited in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/51283 because they weren't implemented correctly before that and were simply ignored.
`ByRef` const values have no identity beyond their value, we should not treat them as having identity. The `AllocId` often differed between equal constants, because of the way that the miri-engine evaluates constants.
Improve the explicit_outlives_requirements lint
* Don't use Strings to compare parameters
* Extend the lint to lifetime bounds
* Extend the lint to enums and unions
* Use the correct span for where clauses in tuple structs
* Try to early-out where possible
* Remove unnecessary bounds in rustc crates
Refactor interning to properly mark memory as mutable or immutable
r? @RalfJung
This implementation is incomplete out of multiple reasons
* [ ] add `-Zunleash_the_miri_inside_of_you` tests
* [ ] report an error if there's an `UnsafeCell` behind a reference in a constant
* [ ] make validity checks actually test whether the mutability of their allocations match what they see in the type
