Update standard library for IntoIterator implementation of arrays
This PR partially resolves issue #84513 of updating the standard library part.
I haven't found any remaining doctest examples which are using iterators over e.g. &i32 instead of just i32 in the standard library. Can anyone point me to them if there's remaining any?
Thanks!
r? ```@m-ou-se```
This also checks the contents and not only the capacity in case IntoIter's clone implementation is changed to add capacity at the end. Extra capacity at the beginning would be needed to make InPlaceIterable work.
Co-authored-by: Giacomo Stevanato <giaco.stevanato@gmail.com>
The unsoundness is not in Peekable per se, it rather is due to the
interaction between Peekable being able to hold an extra item
and vec::IntoIter's clone implementation shortening the allocation.
An alternative solution would be to change IntoIter's clone implementation
to keep enough spare capacity available.
Fix double-drop in `Vec::from_iter(vec.into_iter())` specialization when items drop during panic
This fixes the double-drop but it leaves a behavioral difference compared to the default implementation intact: In the default implementation the source and the destination vec are separate objects, so they get dropped separately. Here they share an allocation and the latter only exists as a pointer into the former. So if dropping the former panics then this fix will leak more items than the default implementation would. Is this acceptable or should the specialization also mimic the default implementation's drops-during-panic behavior?
Fixes#83618
`@rustbot` label T-libs-impl
alloc: Added `as_slice` method to `BinaryHeap` collection
I initially asked about whether it is useful addition on https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/should-i-add-as-slice-method-to-binaryheap/13816, and it seems there were no objections, so went ahead with this PR.
> There is [`BinaryHeap::into_vec`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/struct.BinaryHeap.html#method.into_vec), but it consumes the value. I wonder if there is API design limitation that should be taken into account. Implementation-wise, the inner buffer is just a Vec, so it is trivial to expose as_slice from it.
Please, guide me through if I need to add tests or something else.
UPD: Tracking issue #83659
Add IEEE 754 compliant fmt/parse of -0, infinity, NaN
This pull request improves the Rust float formatting/parsing libraries to comply with IEEE 754's formatting expectations around certain special values, namely signed zero, the infinities, and NaN. It also adds IEEE 754 compliance tests that, while less stringent in certain places than many of the existing flt2dec/dec2flt capability tests, are intended to serve as the beginning of a roadmap to future compliance with the standard. Some relevant documentation is also adjusted with clarifying remarks.
This PR follows from discussion in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1074, and closes#24623.
The most controversial change here is likely to be that -0 is now printed as -0. Allow me to explain: While there appears to be community support for an opt-in toggle of printing floats as if they exist in the naively expected domain of numbers, i.e. not the extended reals (where floats live), IEEE 754-2019 is clear that a float converted to a string should be capable of being transformed into the original floating point bit-pattern when it satisfies certain conditions (namely, when it is an actual numeric value i.e. not a NaN and the original and destination float width are the same). -0 is given special attention here as a value that should have its sign preserved. In addition, the vast majority of other programming languages not only output `-0` but output `-0.0` here.
While IEEE 754 offers a broad leeway in how to handle producing what it calls a "decimal character sequence", it is clear that the operations a language provides should be capable of round tripping, and it is confusing to advertise the f32 and f64 types as binary32 and binary64 yet have the most basic way of producing a string and then reading it back into a floating point number be non-conformant with the standard. Further, existing documentation suggested that e.g. -0 would be printed with -0 regardless of the presence of the `+` fmt character, but it prints "+0" instead if given such (which was what led to the opening of #24623).
There are other parsing and formatting issues for floating point numbers which prevent Rust from complying with the standard, as well as other well-documented challenges on the arithmetic level, but I hope that this can be the beginning of motion towards solving those challenges.
Fixes#83046
The program
fn main() {
println!("{:?}", '"');
println!("{:?}", "'");
}
would previously print
'\"'
"\'"
With this patch it now prints:
'"'
"'"
This commit removes the previous mechanism of differentiating
between "Debug" and "Display" formattings for the sign of -0 so as
to comply with the IEEE 754 standard's requirements on external
character sequences preserving various attributes of a floating
point representation.
In addition, numerous tests are fixed.
Implement String::remove_matches
Closes#50206.
I lifted the function help from `@frewsxcv's` original PR (#50015), hope they don't mind.
I'm also wondering whether it would be useful for `remove_matches` to collect up the removed substrings into a `Vec` and return them, right now they're just overwritten by the copy and lost.
Revert `Vec::spare_capacity_mut` impl to prevent pointers invalidation
The implementation was changed in #79015.
Later it was [pointed out](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81944#issuecomment-782849785) that the implementation invalidates pointers to the buffer (initialized elements) by creating a unique reference to the buffer. This PR reverts the implementation.
r? ```@RalfJung```
Discovered this kind of issue in an unrelated library.
The author copied the tests from here and AFAIK, there are no tests for this particular case.
Signed-off-by: Hanif Bin Ariffin <hanif.ariffin.4326@gmail.com>
Optimize Vec::retain
Use `copy_non_overlapping` instead of `swap` to reduce memory writes, like what we've done in #44355 and `String::retain`.
#48065 already tried to do this optimization but it is reverted in #67300 due to bad codegen of `DrainFilter::drop`.
This PR re-implement the drop-then-move approach. I did a [benchmark](https://gist.github.com/oxalica/3360eec9376f22533fcecff02798b698) on small-no-drop, small-need-drop, large-no-drop elements with different predicate functions. It turns out that the new implementation is >20% faster in average for almost all cases. Only 2/24 cases are slower by 3% and 5%. See the link above for more detail.
I think regression in may-panic cases is due to drop-guard preventing some optimization. If it's permitted to leak elements when predicate function of element's `drop` panic, the new implementation should be almost always faster than current one.
I'm not sure if we should leak on panic, since there is indeed an issue (#52267) complains about it before.
add `Vec::extend_from_within` method under `vec_extend_from_within` feature gate
Implement <https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2714>
### tl;dr
This PR adds a `extend_from_within` method to `Vec` which allows copying elements from a range to the end:
```rust
#![feature(vec_extend_from_within)]
let mut vec = vec![0, 1, 2, 3, 4];
vec.extend_from_within(2..);
assert_eq!(vec, [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 2, 3, 4]);
vec.extend_from_within(..2);
assert_eq!(vec, [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 2, 3, 4, 0, 1]);
vec.extend_from_within(4..8);
assert_eq!(vec, [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 2, 3, 4, 0, 1, 4, 2, 3, 4]);
```
### Implementation notes
Originally I've copied `@Shnatsel's` [implementation](690742a0de/src/lib.rs (L74)) with some minor changes to support other ranges:
```rust
pub fn append_from_within<R>(&mut self, src: R)
where
T: Copy,
R: RangeBounds<usize>,
{
let len = self.len();
let Range { start, end } = src.assert_len(len);;
let count = end - start;
self.reserve(count);
unsafe {
// This is safe because `reserve()` above succeeded,
// so `self.len() + count` did not overflow usize
ptr::copy_nonoverlapping(
self.get_unchecked(src.start),
self.as_mut_ptr().add(len),
count,
);
self.set_len(len + count);
}
}
```
But then I've realized that this duplicates most of the code from (private) `Vec::append_elements`, so I've used it instead.
Then I've applied `@KodrAus` suggestions from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79015#issuecomment-727200852.
Implement <https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2714>, changes from the RFC:
- Rename the method `append_from_within` => `extend_from_within`
- Loose :Copy bound => :Clone
- Specialize in case of :Copy
This commit also adds `Vec::split_at_spare` private method and use it to implement
`Vec::spare_capacity_mut` and `Vec::extend_from_within`. This method returns 2
slices - initialized elements (same as `&mut vec[..]`) and uninitialized but
allocated space (same as `vec.spare_capacity_mut()`).
The return of the GroupBy and GroupByMut iterators on slice
According to https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2477#issuecomment-742034372, I am opening this PR again, this time I implemented it in safe Rust only, it is therefore much easier to read and is completely safe.
This PR proposes to add two new methods to the slice, the `group_by` and `group_by_mut`. These two methods provide a way to iterate over non-overlapping sub-slices of a base slice that are separated by the predicate given by the user (e.g. `Partial::eq`, `|a, b| a.abs() < b.abs()`).
```rust
let slice = &[1, 1, 1, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2];
let mut iter = slice.group_by(|a, b| a == b);
assert_eq!(iter.next(), Some(&[1, 1, 1][..]));
assert_eq!(iter.next(), Some(&[3, 3][..]));
assert_eq!(iter.next(), Some(&[2, 2, 2][..]));
assert_eq!(iter.next(), None);
```
[An RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2477) was open 2 years ago but wasn't necessary.
Move Vec UI tests to unit tests when possible
Helps with #76268.
I'm moving the tests using `Vec` or `VecDeque`.
````@rustbot```` modify labels: A-testsuite C-cleanup T-libs
Add PartialEq impls for Vec <-> slice
This is a follow-up to #71660 and rust-lang/rfcs#2917 to add two more missing vec/slice PartialEq impls:
```
impl<A, B> PartialEq<[B]> for Vec<A> where A: PartialEq<B> { .. }
impl<A, B> PartialEq<Vec<B>> for [A] where A: PartialEq<B> { .. }
```
Since this is insta-stable, it should go through the `@rust-lang/libs` FCP process. Note that I used version 1.47.0 for the `stable` attribute because I assume this will not merge before the 1.46.0 branch is cut next week.
UI to unit test for those using Cell/RefCell/UnsafeCell
Helps with #76268.
I'm working on all files using `Cell` and moving them to unit tests when possible.
r? @matklad
Fix liballoc test suite for Miri
Mostly, fix the regression introduced by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/75207 that caused slices (i.e., references) to be created to invalid memory or memory that has aliasing pointers that we want to keep valid. @dylni this changes the type of `check_range` to only require the length, not the full reference to the slice, which indeed is all the information this function requires.
Also reduce the size of a test introduced in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/70793 to make it not take 3 minutes in Miri.
This makes https://github.com/RalfJung/miri-test-libstd work again.
Detect overflow in proc_macro_server subspan
* Detect overflow in proc_macro_server subspan
* Add tests for overflow in Vec::drain
* Add tests for overflow in String / VecDeque operations using ranges
Optimize behavior of vec.split_off(0) (take all)
Optimization improvement to `split_off()` so the performance meets the
intuitively expected behavior when `at == 0`, avoiding the current behavior
of copying the entire vector.
The change honors documented behavior that the original vector's
"previous capacity unchanged".
This improvement better supports the pattern for building and flushing a
buffer of elements, such as the following:
```rust
let mut vec = Vec::new();
loop {
vec.push(something);
if condition_is_met {
process(vec.split_off(0));
}
}
```
`Option` wrapping is the first alternative I thought of, but is much
less obvious and more verbose:
```rust
let mut capacity = 1;
let mut vec: Option<Vec<Stuff>> = None;
loop {
vec.get_or_insert_with(|| Vec::with_capacity(capacity)).push(something);
if condition_is_met {
capacity = vec.capacity();
process(vec.take().unwrap());
}
}
```
Directly using `mem::replace()` (instead of calling`split_off()`) could work,
but `mem::replace()` is a more advanced tool for Rust developers, and in
this case, I believe developers would assume the standard library should
be sufficient for the purpose described here.
The benefit of the approach to this change is it does not change the
existing API contract, but improves the peformance of `split_off(0)` for
`Vec`, `String` (which delegates `split_off()` to `Vec`), and any other
existing use cases.
This change adds tests to validate the behavior of `split_off()` with
regard to capacity, as originally documented, and confirm that behavior
still holds, when `at == 0`.
The change is an implementation detail, and does not require a
documentation change, but documenting the new behavior as part of its
API contract may benefit future users.
(Let me know if I should make that documentation update.)
Note, for future consideration:
I think it would be helpful to introduce an additional method to `Vec`
(if not also to `String`):
```
pub fn take_all(&mut self) -> Self {
self.split_off(0)
}
```
This would make it more clear how `Vec` supports the pattern, and make
it easier to find, since the behavior is similar to other `take()`
methods in the Rust standard library.
r? `@wesleywiser`
FYI: `@tmandry`
Optimization improvement to `split_off()` so the performance meets the
intuitively expected behavior when `at == 0`, avoiding the current
behavior of copying the entire vector.
The change honors documented behavior that the method leaves the
original vector's "previous capacity unchanged".
This improvement better supports the pattern for building and flushing a
buffer of elements, such as the following:
```rust
let mut vec = Vec::new();
loop {
vec.push(something);
if condition_is_met {
process(vec.split_off(0));
}
}
```
`Option` wrapping is the first alternative I thought of, but is much
less obvious and more verbose:
```rust
let mut capacity = 1;
let mut vec: Option<Vec<Stuff>> = None;
loop {
vec.get_or_insert_with(|| Vec::with_capacity(capacity)).push(something);
if condition_is_met {
capacity = vec.capacity();
process(vec.take().unwrap());
}
}
```
Directly applying `mem::replace()` could work, but `mem::` functions are
typically a last resort, when a developer is actively seeking better
performance than the standard library provides, for example.
The benefit of the approach to this change is it does not change the
existing API contract, but improves the peformance of `split_off(0)` for
`Vec`, `String` (which delegates `split_off()` to `Vec`), and any other
existing use cases.
This change adds tests to validate the behavior of `split_off()` with
regard to capacity, as originally documented, and confirm that behavior
still holds, when `at == 0`.
The change is an implementation detail, and does not require a
documentation change, but documenting the new behavior as part of its
API contract may benefit future users.
(Let me know if I should make that documentation update.)
Note, for future consideration:
I think it would be helpful to introduce an additional method to `Vec`
(if not also to `String`):
```
pub fn take_all(&mut self) -> Self {
self.split_off(0)
}
```
This would make it more clear how `Vec` supports the pattern, and make
it easier to find, since the behavior is similar to other `take()`
methods in the Rust standard library.
Move various ui const tests to `library`
Move:
- `src\test\ui\consts\const-nonzero.rs` to `library\core`
- `src\test\ui\consts\ascii.rs` to `library\core`
- `src\test\ui\consts\cow-is-borrowed` to `library\alloc`
Part of #76268
r? @matklad
Move some Vec UI tests into alloc unit tests
A bit of work towards #76268, makes a number of the Vec UI tests that are simply running code into unit tests. Ensured that they are being run when testing liballoc locally.
