Stabilize core::future::{pending,ready}
This PR stabilizes `core::future::{pending,ready}`, tracking issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/70921.
## Motivation
These functions have been on nightly for three months now, and have lived as part of the futures ecosystem for several years. In that time these functions have undergone several iterations, with [the `async-std` impls](https://docs.rs/async-std/1.6.2/async_std/future/index.html) probably diverging the most (using `async fn`, which in hindsight was a mistake).
It seems the space around these functions has been _thoroughly_ explored over the last couple of years, and the ecosystem has settled on the current shape of the functions. It seems highly unlikely we'd want to make any further changes to these functions, so I propose we stabilize.
## Implementation notes
This stabilization PR was fairly straightforward; this feature has already thoroughly been reviewed by the libs team already in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/70834. So all this PR does is remove the feature gate.
Use intra-doc links in `core::ptr`
Part of #75080.
The only link that I did not change is a link to a function on the
`pointer` primitive because intra-doc links for the `pointer` primitive
don't work yet (see #63351).
---
@rustbot modify labels: A-intra-doc-links T-doc
`write` is ambiguous because there's also a macro called `write`.
Also removed unnecessary and potentially confusing link to a function in
its own docs.
The only link that I did not change is a link to a function on the
`pointer` primitive because intra-doc links for the `pointer` primitive
don't work yet (see #63351).
Remove unneeded `#[cfg(not(test))]` from libcore
This fixes rust-analyzer inside these modules (currently it does not analyze them, assuming they're configured out).
Use ops::ControlFlow in rustc_data_structures::graph::iterate
Since I only know about this because you mentioned it,
r? @ecstatic-morse
If we're not supposed to use new `core` things in compiler for a while then feel free to close, but it felt reasonable to merge the two types since they're the same, and it might be convenient for people to use `?` in their traversal code.
(This doesn't do the type parameter swap; NoraCodes has signed up to do that one.)
Indent a note to make folding work nicer
Sublime Text folds code based on indentation. It maybe an unnecessary change, but does it look nicer after that ?
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
Try to improve the documentation of `filter()` and `filter_map()`.
I believe the documentation is currently a little misleading.
For example, in the docs for `filter()`:
> If the closure returns `false`, it will try again, and call the closure on
> the next element, seeing if it passes the test.
This kind of implies that if the closure returns true then we *don't* "try
again" and no further elements are considered. In actuality that's not the
case, every element is tried regardless of what happened with the previous
element.
This change tries to clarify that by removing the uses of "try again"
altogether.
Use Arc::clone and Rc::clone in documentation
This PR replaces uses of `x.clone()` by `Rc::clone(&x)` (or `Arc::clone(&x)`) to better match the documentation for those types.
@rustbot modify labels: T-doc
I believe the documentation is currently a little misleading.
For example, in the docs for `filter()`:
> If the closure returns `false`, it will try again, and call the closure on
> the next element, seeing if it passes the test.
This kind of implies that if the closure returns true then we *don't* "try
again" and no further elements are considered. In actuality that's not the
case, every element is tried regardless of what happened with the previous
element.
This change tries to clarify that by removing the uses of "try again"
altogether.
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
specialize some collection and iterator operations to run in-place
This is a rebase and update of #66383 which was closed due inactivity.
Recent rustc changes made the compile time regressions disappear, at least for webrender-wrench. Running a stage2 compile and the rustc-perf suite takes hours on the hardware I have at the moment, so I can't do much more than that.
In the best case of the `vec::bench_in_place_recycle` synthetic microbenchmark these optimizations can provide a 15x speedup over the regular implementation which allocates a new vec for every benchmark iteration. [Benchmark results](https://gist.github.com/the8472/6d999b2d08a2bedf3b93f12112f96e2f). In real code the speedups are tiny, but it also depends on the allocator used, a system allocator that uses a process-wide mutex will benefit more than one with thread-local pools.
## What was changed
* `SpecExtend` which covered `from_iter` and `extend` specializations was split into separate traits
* `extend` and `from_iter` now reuse the `append_elements` if passed iterators are from slices.
* A preexisting `vec.into_iter().collect::<Vec<_>>()` optimization that passed through the original vec has been generalized further to also cover cases where the original has been partially drained.
* A chain of *Vec<T> / BinaryHeap<T> / Box<[T]>* `IntoIter`s through various iterator adapters collected into *Vec<U>* and *BinaryHeap<U>* will be performed in place as long as `T` and `U` have the same alignment and size and aren't ZSTs.
* To enable above specialization the unsafe, unstable `SourceIter` and `InPlaceIterable` traits have been added. The first allows reaching through the iterator pipeline to grab a pointer to the source memory. The latter is a marker that promises that the read pointer will advance as fast or faster than the write pointer and thus in-place operation is possible in the first place.
* `vec::IntoIter` implements `TrustedRandomAccess` for `T: Copy` to allow in-place collection when there is a `Zip` adapter in the iterator. TRA had to be made an unstable public trait to support this.
## In-place collectible adapters
* `Map`
* `MapWhile`
* `Filter`
* `FilterMap`
* `Fuse`
* `Skip`
* `SkipWhile`
* `Take`
* `TakeWhile`
* `Enumerate`
* `Zip` (left hand side only, `Copy` types only)
* `Peek`
* `Scan`
* `Inspect`
## Concerns
`vec.into_iter().filter(|_| false).collect()` will no longer return a vec with 0 capacity, instead it will return its original allocation. This avoids the cost of doing any allocation or deallocation but could lead to large allocations living longer than expected.
If that's not acceptable some resizing policy at the end of the attempted in-place collect would be necessary, which in the worst case could result in one more memcopy than the non-specialized case.
## Possible followup work
* split liballoc/vec.rs to remove `ignore-tidy-filelength`
* try to get trivial chains such as `vec.into_iter().skip(1).collect::<Vec<)>>()` to compile to a `memmove` (currently compiles to a pile of SIMD, see #69187 )
* improve up the traits so they can be reused by other crates, e.g. itertools. I think currently they're only good enough for internal use
* allow iterators sourced from a `HashSet` to be in-place collected into a `Vec`
rustdoc: do not use plain summary for trait impls
Fixes#38386.
Fixes#48332.
Fixes#49430.
Fixes#62741.
Fixes#73474.
Unfortunately this is not quite ready to go because the newly-working links trigger a bunch of linkcheck failures. The failures are tough to fix because the links are resolved relative to the implementor, which could be anywhere in the module hierarchy.
(In the current docs, these links end up rendering as uninterpreted markdown syntax, so I don't think these failures are any worse than the status quo. It might be acceptable to just add them to the linkchecker whitelist.)
Ideally this could be fixed with intra-doc links ~~but it isn't working for me: I am currently investigating if it's possible to solve it this way.~~ Opened #73829.
EDIT: This is now ready!
