Additional `*mut [T]` methods
Split out from #94247
This adds the following methods to raw slices that already exist on regular slices
* `*mut [T]::is_empty`
* `*mut [T]::split_at_mut`
* `*mut [T]::split_at_mut_unchecked`
These methods reduce the amount of unsafe code needed to migrate `ChunksMut` and related iterators
to raw slices (#94247)
r? `@m-ou-se`
Rollup of 4 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #96271 (suggest `?` when method is missing on `Result<T, _>` but found on `T`)
- #97264 (Suggest `extern crate foo` when failing to resolve `use foo`)
- #97592 (rustdoc: also index impl trait and raw pointers)
- #97621 (update Miri)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Tweak insert docs
For `{Hash, BTree}Map::insert`, I always have to take a few extra seconds to think about the slight weirdness about the fact that if we "did not" insert (which "sounds" false), we return true, and if we "did" insert, (which "sounds" true), we return false.
This tweaks the doc comments for the `insert` methods of those types (as well as what looks like a rustc internal data structure that I found just by searching the codebase for "If the set did") to first use the "Returns whether _something_" pattern used in e.g. `remove`, where we say that `remove` "returns whether the value was present".
Corrected EBNF grammar for from_str
Hello! This is my first time contributing to an open-source project. I'm excited to have the chance to contribute to the rust community 🥳
I noticed an issue with the documentation for `from_str` in `f32` and `f64`. It states that "All strings that adhere to the following [EBNF](https://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-notation) grammar when lowercased will result in an `Ok` being returned. I believe this is incorrect for the string `"."`, which is valid for the given EBNF grammar, but does not result in an `Ok` being returned ([playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=09f891aa87963a56d3b0d715d8cbc2b4)). I have simplified the grammar in a way which fixes that, but is otherwise identical.
Previously, the `Number` part of the EBNF grammar had an option for `'.' Digit*`, which would include the string `"."`. This is not valid, and does not return an Ok as stated. The corrected version removes this, and still allows for the `'.' Digit+` case with the already existing `Digit* '.' Digit+` case.
simplify code of finding arg index in `opt_const_param_of`
From the FIXME in the impl of `opt_const_param_of`. Part of the code is simplified by blending two iterator statements and using `let...else` statement.
Ensure we never consider the null pointer dereferencable
This replaces the checks that are being removed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97188. Those checks were too early and hence incorrect.
Expose `get_many_mut` and `get_many_unchecked_mut` to HashMap
This pull-request expose the function [`get_many_mut`](https://docs.rs/hashbrown/0.12.0/hashbrown/struct.HashMap.html#method.get_many_mut) and [`get_many_unchecked_mut`](https://docs.rs/hashbrown/0.12.0/hashbrown/struct.HashMap.html#method.get_many_unchecked_mut) from `hashbrown` to the standard library `HashMap` type. They obviously keep the same API and are added under the (new) `map_many_mut` feature.
- `get_many_mut`: Attempts to get mutable references to `N` values in the map at once.
- `get_many_unchecked_mut`: Attempts to get mutable references to `N` values in the map at once, without validating that the values are unique.
library/std: Bump compiler_builtins
Some neat changes include faster float conversions & fixes for AVR 🙂
(note that's it's my first time upgrading `compiler_builtins`, so I'm not 100% sure if bumping `library/std/Cargo.toml` is enough; certainly seems to be so, though.)
Rollup of 4 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #97316 (Put a bound on collection misbehavior)
- #97578 (alloc: remove repeated word in comment)
- #97593 (⬆️ rust-analyzer)
- #97596 (Fixup feature name to be more consistent with others)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Fixup feature name to be more consistent with others
`slice_from_mut_ptr_range_const` -> `const_slice_from_mut_ptr_range`, we usually have `const` in the front.
I've made a typo in #97419
alloc: remove repeated word in comment
Linux's `checkpatch.pl` reports:
```txt
#42544: FILE: rust/alloc/vec/mod.rs:2692:
WARNING: Possible repeated word: 'to'
+ // - Elements are :Copy so it's OK to to copy them, without doing
```
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Put a bound on collection misbehavior
As currently written, when a logic error occurs in a collection's trait parameters, this allows *completely arbitrary* misbehavior, so long as it does not cause undefined behavior in std. However, because the extent of misbehavior is not specified, it is allowed for *any* code in std to start misbehaving in arbitrary ways which are not formally UB; consider the theoretical example of a global which gets set on an observed logic error. Because the misbehavior is only bound by not resulting in UB from safe APIs and the crate-level encapsulation boundary of all of std, this makes writing user unsafe code that utilizes std theoretically impossible, as it now relies on undocumented QOI (quality of implementation) that unrelated parts of std cannot be caused to misbehave by a misuse of std::collections APIs.
In practice, this is a nonconcern, because std has reasonable QOI and an implementation that takes advantage of this freedom is essentially a malicious implementation and only compliant by the most langauage-lawyer reading of the documentation.
To close this hole, we just add a small clause to the existing logic error paragraph that ensures that any misbehavior is limited to the collection which observed the logic error, making it more plausible to prove the soundness of user unsafe code.
This is not meant to be formal; a formal refinement would likely need to mention that values derived from the collection can also misbehave after a logic error is observed, as well as define what it means to "observe" a logic error in the first place. This fix errs on the side of informality in order to close the hole without complicating a normal reading which can assume a reasonable nonmalicious QOI.
See also [discussion on IRLO][1].
[1]: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/using-std-collections-and-unsafe-anything-can-happen/16640
r? rust-lang/libs-api ```@rustbot``` label +T-libs-api -T-libs
This technically adds a new guarantee to the documentation, though I argue as written it's one already implicitly provided.
Add a pointer to address cast kind
A pointer to address cast are often special-cased. Introduce a dedicated cast kind to make them easy distinguishable.
Fix TLS access mir opt test and remove stale files
Thanks `@pietroalbini` for noticing that the TLS test was not doing what it was supposed to. Switched to `PreCodegen` because `SimplifyCfg` does not run on opt level 0.
Also addresses the easy part of #97564 .
r? rust-lang/mir-opt
Clarify the guarantees of Vec::as_ptr and Vec::as_mut_ptr when there's no allocation
Currently the documentation says they return a pointer to the vector's buffer, which has the implied precondition that the vector allocated some memory. However `Vec`'s documentation also specifies that it won't always allocate, so it's unclear whether the pointer returned is valid in that case. Of course you won't be able to read/write actual bytes to/from it since the capacity is 0, but there's an exception: zero sized read/writes. They are still valid as long as the pointer is not null and the memory it points to wasn't deallocated, but `Vec::as_ptr` and `Vec::as_mut_ptr` don't specify that's not the case. This PR thus specifies they are actually valid for zero sized reads since `Vec` is implemented to hold a dangling pointer in those cases, which is neither null nor was deallocated.
Linux's `checkpatch.pl` reports:
```txt
#42544: FILE: rust/alloc/vec/mod.rs:2692:
WARNING: Possible repeated word: 'to'
+ // - Elements are :Copy so it's OK to to copy them, without doing
```
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Add unicode fast path to `is_printable`
Before, it would enter the full expensive check even for normal ascii characters. Now, it skips the check for the ascii characters in `32..127`. This range was checked manually from the current behavior.
I ran the `tracing` test suite in miri, and it was really slow. I looked at a profile, and miri spent most of the time in `core::char::methods::escape_debug_ext`, where half of that was dominated by `core::unicode::printable::is_printable`. So I optimized it here.
The tracing profile:
![The tracing profile](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/48135649/170883650-23876e7b-3fd1-4e8b-9001-47672e06d914.svg)
Before, it would enter the full expensive check even for normal ascii
characters. Now, it skips the check for the ascii characters in
`32..127`. This range was checked manually from the current behavior.
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #97089 (Improve settings theme display)
- #97229 (Document the current aliasing rules for `Box<T>`.)
- #97371 (Suggest adding a semicolon to a closure without block)
- #97455 (Stabilize `toowned_clone_into`)
- #97565 (Add doc alias `memset` to `write_bytes`)
- #97569 (Remove `memset` alias from `fill_with`.)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Add doc alias `memset` to `write_bytes`
I were looking for `memset` in rust, but the docs only pointed me to `slice::fill`.
With only the old aliases, one might write code like this, which is incorrect if the memory is uninitialized.
``` Rust
core::slice::from_raw_parts(ptr, len).fill(0)
```
Document the current aliasing rules for `Box<T>`.
Currently, `Box<T>` gets `noalias`, meaning it has the same rules as `&mut T`. This is sparsely documented, even though it can have quite a big impact on unsafe code using box. Therefore, these rules are documented here, with a big warning that they are not normative and subject to change, since we have not yet committed to an aliasing model and the state of `Box<T>` is especially uncertain.
If you have any suggestions and improvements, make sure to leave them here. This is mostly intended to inform people about what is currently going on (to prevent misunderstandings such as [Jon Gjengset's Box aliasing](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY7Wi9fV5bk)).
This is supposed to _only document current UB_ and not add any new guarantees or rules.
Implement [OsStr]::join
Implements join for `OsStr` and `OsString` slices:
```Rust
let strings = [OsStr::new("hello"), OsStr::new("dear"), OsStr::new("world")];
assert_eq!("hello dear world", strings.join(OsStr::new(" ")));
````
This saves one from converting to strings and back, or from implementing it manually.
This PR has been re-filed after #96744 was first accidentally merged and then reverted.
The change is instantly stable and thus:
r? rust-lang/libs-api `@rustbot` label +T-libs-api -T-libs
cc `@thomcc` `@m-ou-se` `@faptc`
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #89685 (refactor: VecDeques Iter fields to private)
- #97172 (Optimize the diagnostic generation for `extern unsafe`)
- #97395 (Miri call ABI check: ensure type size+align stay the same)
- #97431 (don't do `Sized` and other return type checks on RPIT's real type)
- #97555 (Source code page: line number click adds `NaN`)
- #97558 (Fix typos in comment)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup