This commit adds a new trait, MutableVectorAllocating, which represents
functions on vectors which can allocate.
This is another extension trait to slices which should be removed once a lang
item exists for the ~ allocation.
for `~str`/`~[]`.
Note that `~self` still remains, since I forgot to add support for
`Box<self>` before the snapshot.
How to update your code:
* Instead of `~EXPR`, you should write `box EXPR`.
* Instead of `~TYPE`, you should write `Box<Type>`.
* Instead of `~PATTERN`, you should write `box PATTERN`.
[breaking-change]
This removes all resizability support for ~[T] vectors in preparation of DST.
The only growable vector remaining is Vec<T>. In summary, the following methods
from ~[T] and various functions were removed. Each method/function has an
equivalent on the Vec type in std::vec unless otherwise stated.
* slice::OwnedCloneableVector
* slice::OwnedEqVector
* slice::append
* slice::append_one
* slice::build (no replacement)
* slice::bytes::push_bytes
* slice::from_elem
* slice::from_fn
* slice::with_capacity
* ~[T].capacity()
* ~[T].clear()
* ~[T].dedup()
* ~[T].extend()
* ~[T].grow()
* ~[T].grow_fn()
* ~[T].grow_set()
* ~[T].insert()
* ~[T].pop()
* ~[T].push()
* ~[T].push_all()
* ~[T].push_all_move()
* ~[T].remove()
* ~[T].reserve()
* ~[T].reserve_additional()
* ~[T].reserve_exect()
* ~[T].retain()
* ~[T].set_len()
* ~[T].shift()
* ~[T].shrink_to_fit()
* ~[T].swap_remove()
* ~[T].truncate()
* ~[T].unshift()
* ~str.clear()
* ~str.set_len()
* ~str.truncate()
Note that no other API changes were made. Existing apis that took or returned
~[T] continue to do so.
[breaking-change]
Previously, all slices derived from a vector whose values were of size 0 had a
null pointer as the 'data' pointer on the slice. This caused first pointer to be
yielded during iteration to always be the null pointer. Due to the null pointer
optimization, this meant that the first return value was None, instead of
Some(&T).
This commit changes slice construction from a Vec instance to use a base pointer
of 1 if the values have zero size. This means that the iterator will never
return null, and the iteration will proceed appropriately.
Closes#13467
A vector can reuse its allocation (and the allocations/resources of any
contained values) when cloning into an already-instantiated vector, so
we might as well do so.
This commit contains an implementation of synchronous, bounded channels for
Rust. This is an implementation of the proposal made last January [1]. These
channels are built on mutexes, and currently focus on a working implementation
rather than speed. Receivers for sync channels have select() implemented for
them, but there is currently no implementation of select() for sync senders.
Rust will continue to provide both synchronous and asynchronous channels as part
of the standard distribution, there is no intent to remove asynchronous
channels. This flavor of channels is meant to provide an alternative to
asynchronous channels because like green tasks, asynchronous channels are not
appropriate for all situations.
[1] - https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2014-January/007924.html
`TotalEq` is now just an assertion about the `Eq` impl of a
type (i.e. `==` is a total equality if a type implements `TotalEq`) so
the extra method is just confusing.
Also, a new method magically appeared as a hack to allow deriving to
assert that the contents of a struct/enum are also TotalEq, because the
deriving infrastructure makes it very hard to do anything but create a
trait method. (You didn't hear about this horrible work-around from me
:(.)
Replace syntax::opt_vec with syntax::owned_slice
The `owned_slice::OwnedSlice` is `(*T, uint)` (i.e. a direct equivalent to DSTs `~[T]`).
This shaves two words off the old OptVec type; and also makes substituting in other implementations easy, by removing all the mutation methods. (And also everything that's very rarely/never used.)
* `Ord` inherits from `Eq`
* `TotalOrd` inherits from `TotalEq`
* `TotalOrd` inherits from `Ord`
* `TotalEq` inherits from `Eq`
This is a partial implementation of #12517.
Formatting via reflection has been a little questionable for some time now, and
it's a little unfortunate that one of the standard macros will silently use
reflection when you weren't expecting it. This adds small bits of code bloat to
libraries, as well as not always being necessary. In light of this information,
this commit switches assert_eq!() to using {} in the error message instead of
{:?}.
In updating existing code, there were a few error cases that I encountered:
* It's impossible to define Show for [T, ..N]. I think DST will alleviate this
because we can define Show for [T].
* A few types here and there just needed a #[deriving(Show)]
* Type parameters needed a Show bound, I often moved this to `assert!(a == b)`
* `Path` doesn't implement `Show`, so assert_eq!() cannot be used on two paths.
I don't think this is much of a regression though because {:?} on paths looks
awful (it's a byte array).
Concretely speaking, this shaved 10K off a 656K binary. Not a lot, but sometime
significant for smaller binaries.
This weeds out a bunch of warnings building stdtest on windows, and it also adds
a check! macro to the io::fs tests to help diagnose errors that are cropping up
on windows platforms as well.
cc #12516
With the stability attributes we can put public-but unstable modules next to others, so this moves `intrinsics` and `raw` out of the `unstable` module (and marks both as `#[experimental]`).
These two containers are indeed collections, so their place is in
libcollections, not in libstd. There will always be a hash map as part of the
standard distribution of Rust, but by moving it out of the standard library it
makes libstd that much more portable to more platforms and environments.
This conveniently also removes the stuttering of 'std::hashmap::HashMap',
although 'collections::HashMap' is only one character shorter.
This "bubble up an error" macro was originally named if_ok! in order to get it
landed, but after the fact it was discovered that this name is not exactly
desirable.
The name `if_ok!` isn't immediately clear that is has much to do with error
handling, and it doesn't look fantastic in all contexts (if if_ok!(...) {}). In
general, the agreed opinion about `if_ok!` is that is came in as subpar.
The name `try!` is more invocative of error handling, it's shorter by 2 letters,
and it looks fitting in almost all circumstances. One concern about the word
`try!` is that it's too invocative of exceptions, but the belief is that this
will be overcome with documentation and examples.
Close#12037
