This is part of the ongoing renaming of the equality traits. See #12517 for more
details. All code using Eq/Ord will temporarily need to move to Partial{Eq,Ord}
or the Total{Eq,Ord} traits. The Total traits will soon be renamed to {Eq,Ord}.
cc #12517
[breaking-change]
A number of functions/methods have been moved or renamed to align
better with rust standard conventions.
syntax::ext::mtwt::xorPush => xor_push
syntax::parse::parser::Parser => Parser::new
[breaking-change]
All of these features have been obsolete since February 2014, where most have
been obsolete since 2013. There shouldn't be any more need to keep around the
parser hacks after this length of time.
1. Wherever the `buf` field of a `Formatter` was used, the `Formatter` is used
instead.
2. The usage of `write_fmt` is minimized as much as possible, the `write!` macro
is preferred wherever possible.
3. Usage of `fmt::write` is minimized, favoring the `write!` macro instead.
Integers are always parsed as a u64 in libsyntax, but they're stored as i64. The
parser and pretty printer both printed an i64 instead of u64, sometimes
introducing an extra negative sign.
Previously, the parser would not allow you to simultaneously implement a
function with a different abi as well as being unsafe at the same time. This
extends the parser to allow functions of the form:
unsafe extern fn foo() {
// ...
}
The closure type grammar was also changed to reflect this reversal, types
previously written as "extern unsafe fn()" must now be written as
"unsafe extern fn()". The parser currently has a hack which allows the old
style, but this will go away once a snapshot has landed.
Closes#10025
[breaking-change]
Clearly storing them as `char` is semantically nicer, but this also
fixes a bug whereby `quote_expr!(cx, 'a')` wasn't working, because the
code created by quotation was not matching the actual AST definitions.
This PR is primarily motivated by (and fixes) #12926.
We currently only have a span for the individual item itself and not for the referred contents. This normally does not cause a problem since both are located in the same file; it *is* possible that the contained statement or item is located in the other file (the syntax extension can do that), but even in that case the syntax extension should be located in the same file as the item. The module item (i.e. `mod foo;`) is the only exception here, and thus warrants a special treatment.
Rustdoc would now distinguish `mod foo;` from `mod foo {...}` by checking if the span for the module item and module contents is in different files. If it's the case, we'd prefer module contents over module item. There are alternative strategies, but as noted above we will have some corner cases if we don't record the contents span explicitly.
this is useful when the module item and module contents are defined
from different files (like rustdoc). in most cases the original span
for the module item would be used; in other cases, the span for
module contents is available separately at the `inner` field.
it reflected the obsolete syntax `use a, b, c;` and did not make
past the parser (though it was a non-fatal error so we can continue).
this legacy affected many portions of rustc and rustdoc as well,
so this commit cleans them up altogether.
Specifically, the method parameter cardinality mismatch or missing
method error message span now gets method itself exactly. It was the
whole expression.
Closes#9390Closes#13684Closes#13709
Specifically, the method parameter cardinality mismatch or missing
method error message span now gets method itself exactly. It was the
whole expression.
Closes#9390Closes#13684Closes#13709
Now with proper checking of enums and allows unsized fields as the last field in a struct or variant. This PR only checks passing of unsized types and distinguishing them from sized ones. To be safe we also need to control storage.
Closes issues #12969 and #13121, supersedes #13375 (all the discussion there is valid here too).
This currently requires linking against a library like libquadmath (or
libgcc), because compiler-rt barely has any support for this and most
hardware does not yet have 128-bit precision floating point. For this
reason, it's currently hidden behind a feature gate.
When compiler-rt is updated to trunk, some tests can be added for
constant evaluation since there will be support for the comparison
operators.
Closes#13381
This removes the `priv` keyword from the language and removes private enum
variants as a result. The remaining use cases of private enum variants were all
updated to be a struct with one private field that is a private enum.
RFC: 0006-remove-priv
Closes#13535
This change removes the AbiSet from the AST, converting all usage to have just
one Abi value. The current scheme selects a relevant ABI given a list of ABIs
based on the target architecture and how relevant each ABI is to that
architecture.
Instead of this mildly complicated scheme, only one ABI will be allowed in abi
strings, and pseudo-abis will be created for special cases as necessary. For
example the "system" abi exists for stdcall on win32 and C on win64.
Closes#10049
This is a continuation of the work done in #13184 to make struct fields private
by default. This commit finishes RFC 4 by making all tuple structs have private
fields by default. Note that enum variants are not affected.
A tuple struct having a private field means that it cannot be matched on in a
pattern match (both refutable and irrefutable), and it also cannot have a value
specified to be constructed. Similarly to private fields, switching the type of
a private field in a tuple struct should be able to be done in a backwards
compatible way.
The one snag that I ran into which wasn't mentioned in the RFC is that this
commit also forbids taking the value of a tuple struct constructor. For example,
this code now fails to compile:
mod a {
pub struct A(int);
}
let a: fn(int) -> a::A = a::A; //~ ERROR: first field is private
Although no fields are bound in this example, it exposes implementation details
through the type itself. For this reason, taking the value of a struct
constructor with private fields is forbidden (outside the containing module).
RFC: 0004-private-fields
This change is in preparation for #8122. Nothing is currently done with these
visibility qualifiers, they are just parsed and accepted by the compiler.
RFC: 0004-private-fields
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.)
`Share` implies that all *reachable* content is *threadsafe*.
Threadsafe is defined as "exposing no operation that permits a data race if multiple threads have access to a &T pointer simultaneously". (NB: the type system should guarantee that if you have access to memory via a &T pointer, the only other way to gain access to that memory is through another &T pointer)...
Fixes#11781
cc #12577
What this PR will do
================
- [x] Add Share kind and
- [x] Replace usages of Freeze with Share in bounds.
- [x] Add Unsafe<T> #12577
- [x] Forbid taking the address of a immutable static item with `Unsafe<T>` interior
What's left to do in a separate PR (after the snapshot)?
===========================================
- Remove `Freeze` completely
