Implement `Send` and `Sync` for `ThinBox<T>`
Just like `Box<T>`, `ThinBox<T>` owns its data on the heap, so it should
implement `Send` and `Sync` when `T` does.
This extends tracking issue #92791.
Fix `panic` message for `BTreeSet`'s `range` API and document `panic` cases
Currently, the `panic` cases for [`BTreeSet`'s `range` API](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/struct.BTreeSet.html#method.range) are undocumented and produce a slightly wrong `panic` message (says `BTreeMap` instead of `BTreeSet`).
Panic case 1 code:
```rust
use std::collections::BTreeSet;
use std::ops::Bound::Excluded;
fn main() {
let mut set = BTreeSet::new();
set.insert(3);
set.insert(5);
set.insert(8);
for &elem in set.range((Excluded(&3), Excluded(&3))) {
println!("{elem}");
}
}
```
Panic case 1 message:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'range start and end are equal and excluded in BTreeMap', /rustc/fe5b13d681f25ee6474be29d748c65adcd91f69e/library/alloc/src/collections/btree/search.rs:105:17
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
```
Panic case 2 code:
```rust
use std::collections::BTreeSet;
use std::ops::Bound::Included;
fn main() {
let mut set = BTreeSet::new();
set.insert(3);
set.insert(5);
set.insert(8);
for &elem in set.range((Included(&8), Included(&3))) {
println!("{elem}");
}
}
```
Panic case 2:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'range start is greater than range end in BTreeMap', /rustc/fe5b13d681f25ee6474be29d748c65adcd91f69e/library/alloc/src/collections/btree/search.rs:110:17
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
```
This PR fixes the output messages to say `BTreeSet`, adds the relevant unit tests, and updates the documentation for the API.
clarify Arc::clone overflow check comment
I had to read this twice to realize that this is explaining that the code is technically unsound, so move that into a dedicated paragraph and make the wording a bit more explicit.
Fix documentation for `with_capacity` and `reserve` families of methods
Fixes#95614
Documentation for the following methods
- `with_capacity`
- `with_capacity_in`
- `with_capacity_and_hasher`
- `reserve`
- `reserve_exact`
- `try_reserve`
- `try_reserve_exact`
was inconsistent and often not entirely correct where they existed on the following types
- `Vec`
- `VecDeque`
- `String`
- `OsString`
- `PathBuf`
- `BinaryHeap`
- `HashSet`
- `HashMap`
- `BufWriter`
- `LineWriter`
since the allocator is allowed to allocate more than the requested capacity in all such cases, and will frequently "allocate" much more in the case of zero-sized types (I also checked `BufReader`, but there the docs appear to be accurate as it appears to actually allocate the exact capacity).
Some effort was made to make the documentation more consistent between types as well.
Documentation for the following methods
with_capacity
with_capacity_in
with_capacity_and_hasher
reserve
reserve_exact
try_reserve
try_reserve_exact
was inconsistent and often not entirely correct where they existed on the following types
Vec
VecDeque
String
OsString
PathBuf
BinaryHeap
HashSet
HashMap
BufWriter
LineWriter
since the allocator is allowed to allocate more than the requested capacity in all such cases, and will frequently "allocate" much more in the case of zero-sized types (I also checked BufReader, but there the docs appear to be accurate as it appears to actually allocate the exact capacity).
Some effort was made to make the documentation more consistent between types as well.
Fix with_capacity* methods for Vec
Fix *reserve* methods for Vec
Fix docs for *reserve* methods of VecDeque
Fix docs for String::with_capacity
Fix docs for *reserve* methods of String
Fix docs for OsString::with_capacity
Fix docs for *reserve* methods on OsString
Fix docs for with_capacity* methods on HashSet
Fix docs for *reserve methods of HashSet
Fix docs for with_capacity* methods of HashMap
Fix docs for *reserve methods on HashMap
Fix expect messages about OOM in doctests
Fix docs for BinaryHeap::with_capacity
Fix docs for *reserve* methods of BinaryHeap
Fix typos
Fix docs for with_capacity on BufWriter and LineWriter
Fix consistent use of `hasher` between `HashMap` and `HashSet`
Fix warning in doc test
Add test for capacity of vec with ZST
Fix doc test error
Add VecDeque::extend from TrustedLen specialization
Continuation of #95904
Inspired by how [`VecDeque::copy_slice` works](c08b235a5c/library/alloc/src/collections/vec_deque/mod.rs (L437-L454)).
## Benchmarks
Before
```
test vec_deque::bench_extend_chained_bytes ... bench: 1,026 ns/iter (+/- 17)
test vec_deque::bench_extend_chained_trustedlen ... bench: 1,024 ns/iter (+/- 40)
test vec_deque::bench_extend_trustedlen ... bench: 637 ns/iter (+/- 693)
```
After
```
test vec_deque::bench_extend_chained_bytes ... bench: 828 ns/iter (+/- 24)
test vec_deque::bench_extend_chained_trustedlen ... bench: 25 ns/iter (+/- 1)
test vec_deque::bench_extend_trustedlen ... bench: 21 ns/iter (+/- 0)
```
## Why do it this way
https://rust.godbolt.org/z/15qY1fMYh
The Compiler Explorer example shows how "just" removing the capacity check, like the [`Vec` `TrustedLen` specialization](c08b235a5c/library/alloc/src/vec/spec_extend.rs (L22-L58)) does, wouldn't have been enough for `VecDeque`. `wrap_add` would still have greatly limited what LLVM could do while optimizing.
---
r? `@the8472`
btree: avoid forcing the allocator to be a reference
The previous code forces the actual allocator used to be some `&A`. This generalizes the code to allow any `A: Copy`. If people truly want to use a reference, they can use `&A` themselves.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/98176
Entry and_modify doc
This PR modifies the documentation for [HashMap](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/struct.HashMap.html#) and [BTreeMap](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/struct.BTreeMap.html#) by introducing examples for `and_modify`. `and_modify` is a function that tends to give more idiomatic rust code when dealing with these data structures -- yet it lacked examples and was hidden away. This PR adds that and addresses #98122.
I've made some choices which I tried to explain in my commits. This is my first time contributing to rust, so hopefully, I made the right choices.
Updated the btree's documentation to include two references to
add_modify.
The first is when the `Entry` API is mentioned at the beginning. With
the same reasoning as HashMap's documentation, I thought it would best
to keep `attack`, but show the `mana` example.
The second is with the `entry` function that is used for the `Entry`
API. The code example was a perfect use for `add_modify`, which is why
it was changed to reflect that.
BTreeSet: avoid intermediate sorting when collecting sorted iterators
As [pointed out by droundy](https://users.rust-lang.org/t/question-about-btreeset-implementation/76427), an obvious optimization is to skip the first step introduced by #88448 (creation of a vector and sorting) and it's easy to do so for btree's own iterators. Also, exploit `from` in the examples.
Remove migrate borrowck mode
Closes#58781Closes#43234
# Stabilization proposal
This PR proposes the stabilization of `#![feature(nll)]` and the removal of `-Z borrowck`. Current borrow checking behavior of item bodies is currently done by first infering regions *lexically* and reporting any errors during HIR type checking. If there *are* any errors, then MIR borrowck (NLL) never occurs. If there *aren't* any errors, then MIR borrowck happens and any errors there would be reported. This PR removes the lexical region check of item bodies entirely and only uses MIR borrowck. Because MIR borrowck could never *not* be run for a compiled program, this should not break any programs. It does, however, change diagnostics significantly and allows a slightly larger set of programs to compile.
Tracking issue: #43234
RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2094-nll.md
Version: 1.63 (2022-06-30 => beta, 2022-08-11 => stable).
## Motivation
Over time, the Rust borrow checker has become "smarter" and thus allowed more programs to compile. There have been three different implementations: AST borrowck, MIR borrowck, and polonius (well, in progress). Additionally, there is the "lexical region resolver", which (roughly) solves the constraints generated through HIR typeck. It is not a full borrow checker, but does emit some errors.
The AST borrowck was the original implementation of the borrow checker and was part of the initially stabilized Rust 1.0. In mid 2017, work began to implement the current MIR borrow checker and that effort ompleted by the end of 2017, for the most part. During 2018, efforts were made to migrate away from the AST borrow checker to the MIR borrow checker - eventually culminating into "migrate" mode - where HIR typeck with lexical region resolving following by MIR borrow checking - being active by default in the 2018 edition.
In early 2019, migrate mode was turned on by default in the 2015 edition as well, but with MIR borrowck errors emitted as warnings. By late 2019, these warnings were upgraded to full errors. This was followed by the complete removal of the AST borrow checker.
In the period since, various errors emitted by the MIR borrow checker have been improved to the point that they are mostly the same or better than those emitted by the lexical region resolver.
While there do remain some degradations in errors (tracked under the [NLL-diagnostics tag](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3ANLL-diagnostics), those are sufficiently small and rare enough that increased flexibility of MIR borrow check-only is now a worthwhile tradeoff.
## What is stabilized
As said previously, this does not fundamentally change the landscape of accepted programs. However, there are a [few](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3ANLL-fixed-by-NLL) cases where programs can compile under `feature(nll)`, but not otherwise.
There are two notable patterns that are "fixed" by this stabilization. First, the `scoped_threads` feature, which is a continutation of a pre-1.0 API, can sometimes emit a [weird lifetime error](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/95527) without NLL. Second, actually seen in the standard library. In the `Extend` impl for `HashMap`, there is an implied bound of `K: 'a` that is available with NLL on but not without - this is utilized in the impl.
As mentioned before, there are a large number of diagnostic differences. Most of them are better, but some are worse. None are serious or happen often enough to need to block this PR. The biggest change is the loss of error code for a number of lifetime errors in favor of more general "lifetime may not live long enough" error. While this may *seem* bad, the former error codes were just attempts to somewhat-arbitrarily bin together lifetime errors of the same type; however, on paper, they end up being roughly the same with roughly the same kinds of solutions.
## What isn't stabilized
This PR does not completely remove the lexical region resolver. In the future, it may be possible to remove that (while still keeping HIR typeck) or to remove it together with HIR typeck.
## Tests
Many test outputs get updated by this PR. However, there are number of tests specifically geared towards NLL under `src/test/ui/nll`
## History
* On 2017-07-14, [tracking issue opened](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/43234)
* On 2017-07-20, [initial empty MIR pass added](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/43271)
* On 2017-08-29, [RFC opened](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2094)
* On 2017-11-16, [Integrate MIR type-checker with NLL](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/45825)
* On 2017-12-20, [NLL feature complete](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/46862)
* On 2018-07-07, [Don't run AST borrowck on mir mode](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/52083)
* On 2018-07-27, [Add migrate mode](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/52681)
* On 2019-04-22, [Enable migrate mode on 2015 edition](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/59114)
* On 2019-08-26, [Don't downgrade errors on 2015 edition](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/64221)
* On 2019-08-27, [Remove AST borrowck](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/64790)
Avoid zero-sized allocs in ThinBox if T and H are both ZSTs.
This was surprisingly tricky, and took longer to get right than expected. `ThinBox` is a surprisingly subtle piece of code. That said, in the end, a lot of this was due to overthinking[^overthink] -- ultimately the fix ended up fairly clean and simple.
[^overthink]: Honestly, for a while I was convinced this couldn't be done without allocations or runtime branches in these cases, but that's obviously untrue.
Anyway, as a result of spending all that time debugging, I've extended the tests quite a bit, and also added more debug assertions. Many of these helped for subtle bugs I made in the middle (for example, the alloc/drop tracking is because I ended up double-dropping the value in the case where both were ZSTs), they're arguably a bit of overkill at this point, although I imagine they could help in the future too.
Anyway, these tests cover a wide range of size/align cases, nd fully pass under miri[^1]. They also do some smoke-check asserting that the value has the correct alignment, although in practice it's totally within the compiler's rights to delete these assertions since we'd have already done UB if they get hit. They have more boilerplate than they really need, but it's not *too* bad on a per-test basis.
A notable absence from testing is atypical header types, but at the moment it's impossible to manually implement `Pointee`. It would be really nice to have testing here, since it's not 100% obvious to me that the aligned read/write we use for `H` are correct in the face of arbitrary combinations of `size_of::<H>()`, `align_of::<H>()`, and `align_of::<T>()`. (That said, I spent a while thinking through it and am *pretty* sure it's fine -- I'd just feel... better if we could test some cases for non-ZST headers which have unequal and align).
[^1]: Or at least, they pass under miri if I copy the code and tests into a new crate and run miri on it (after making it less stdlibified).
Fixes#96485.
I'd request review ``@yaahc,`` but I believe you're taking some time away from reviews, so I'll request from the previous PR's reviewer (I think that the context helps, even if the actual change didn't end up being bad here).
r? ``@joshtriplett``
Improve documentation for constructors of pinned `Box`es
Adds a cross-references between `Box::pin` and `Box::into_pin` (and other related methods, i.e. the equivalent `From` implementation, and the unstable `pin_in` method), in particular now that `into_pin` [was stabilized](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97397). The main goal is to further improve visibility of the fact that `Box<T> -> Pin<Box<T>>` conversion exits in the first place, and that `Box::pin(x)` is – essentially – just a convenience function for `Box::into_pin(Box::new(x))`
The motivating context why I think this is important is even experienced Rust users overlooking the existence this kind of conversion, [e.g. in this thread on IRLO](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-rfc-function-variants/16732/7?u=steffahn); and also the fact that that discussion brought up that there would be a bunch of Box-construction methods "missing" such as e.g. methods with fallible allocation a la "`Box::try_pin`", and similar; while those are in fact *not* necessary, because you can use `Box::into_pin(Box::try_new(x)?)` instead.
I have *not* included explicit mention of methods (e.g. `try_new`) in the docs of stable methods (e.g. `into_pin`). (Referring to unstable API in stable API docs would be bad style IMO.) Stable examples I have in mind with the statement "constructing a (pinned) Box in a different way than with `Box::new`" are things like cloning a `Box`, or `Box::from_raw`. If/when `try_new` would get stabilized, it would become a very good concrete example use-case of `Box::into_pin` IMO.
Add #[rustc_box] and use it inside alloc
This commit adds an alternative content boxing syntax, and uses it inside alloc.
```Rust
#![feature(box_syntax)]
fn foo() {
let foo = box bar;
}
```
is equivalent to
```Rust
#![feature(rustc_attrs)]
fn foo() {
let foo = #[rustc_box] Box::new(bar);
}
```
The usage inside the very performance relevant code in
liballoc is the only remaining relevant usage of box syntax
in the compiler (outside of tests, which are comparatively easy to port).
box syntax was originally designed to be used by all Rust
developers. This introduces a replacement syntax more tailored
to only being used inside the Rust compiler, and with it,
lays the groundwork for eventually removing box syntax.
[Earlier work](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87781#issuecomment-894714878) by `@nbdd0121` to lower `Box::new` to `box` during THIR -> MIR building ran into borrow checker problems, requiring the lowering to be adjusted in a way that led to [performance regressions](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87781#issuecomment-894872367). The proposed change in this PR lowers `#[rustc_box] Box::new` -> `box` in the AST -> HIR lowering step, which is way earlier in the compiler, and thus should cause less issues both performance wise as well as regarding type inference/borrow checking/etc. Hopefully, future work can move the lowering further back in the compiler, as long as there are no performance regressions.
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".
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.
