- Most functions that used to return `~[~str]` for a list of substrings got turned into iterators over `&str` slices
- Some cleanup of apis, docs and code layout
and from typeck, which is verboten. We are supposed to write inference results
into the FnCtxt and then these get copied over in writeback. Add assertions
that no inference by-products are added to this table.
Fixes#3888Fixes#4036Fixes#4492
This currently requires workarounds for the borrow checker not being flow-sensitive for `LinearMap` and `TrieMap`, but it can already be expressed for `TreeMap` and `SmallIntMap` without that.
`let v = [24, ..1000];` now more or less emits the same IR as:
```Rust
let mut i = 0;
while i < 1000 {
v[i] = 24;
i += 1;
}
```
LLVM will still turn it into a memset if possible with optimization on.
This makes the `trim` and `substr` functions return a slice instead of an `~str`, and removes the unnecessary `Trimmable` trait (`StrSlice` already contains the same functionality).
Also moves the `ToStr` implementations for the three str types into the str module in anticipation of further untangling.
The old string benchmarks weren't very useful because the strings weren't long enough, so I just threw those out for now. I left out benchmarks of `oldmap` because it's clear that it's 30-40% slower and it doesn't implement the `Map` trait.
This also cleanly divides up `insert`, `search` and `remove`.
Adds an assert_eq! macro that asserts that its two arguments are equal. Error messages can therefore be somewhat more informative than a simple assert, because the error message includes "expected" and "given" values.
r? @nikomatsakis The typechecker previously passed around a boolean return flag to
indicate whether it saw something with type _|_ (that is, something
it knows at compile-time will definitely diverge) and also had some
manual checks for the `ty_err` pseudo-type that represents a previous
type error. This was because the typing rules implemented by the
typechecker didn't properly propagate _|_ and ty_err. I fixed it.
This also required changing expected error messages in a few tests,
as now we're printing out fewer derived errors -- in fact, at this
point we should print out no derived errors, so report any that
you see (ones that include "[type error]") as bugs.
A slice now always refers to something that returns an borrowed pointer, views don't exist anymore. If you want to have an explictit copy of a slice, use `to_owned()`
The typechecker previously passed around a boolean return flag to
indicate whether it saw something with type _|_ (that is, something
it knows at compile-time will definitely diverge) and also had some
manual checks for the `ty_err` pseudo-type that represents a previous
type error. This was because the typing rules implemented by the
typechecker didn't properly propagate _|_ and ty_err. I fixed it.
This also required changing expected error messages in a few tests,
as now we're printing out fewer derived errors -- in fact, at this
point we should print out no derived errors, so report any that
you see (ones that include "[type error]") as bugs.
the assert_eq! macro compares its arguments and fails if they're not
equal. It's more informative than fail_unless!, because it explicitly
writes the given and expected arguments on failure.
This would close#2761. I figured that if you're supplying your own custom message, you probably don't mind the stringification of the condition to not be in the message.
For bootstrapping purposes, this commit does not remove all uses of
the keyword "pure" -- doing so would cause the compiler to no longer
bootstrap due to some syntax extensions ("deriving" in particular).
Instead, it makes the compiler ignore "pure". Post-snapshot, we can
remove "pure" from the language.
There are quite a few (~100) borrow check errors that were essentially
all the result of mutable fields or partial borrows of `@mut`. Per
discussions with Niko I think we want to allow partial borrows of
`@mut` but detect obvious footguns. We should also improve the error
message when `@mut` is erroneously reborrowed.
adjusting a few foreign functions that were declared with by-ref
mode. This also allows us to remove by-val mode in the near future.
With copy mode, though, we have to be careful because Rust will implicitly pass
somethings by pointer but this may not be the C ABI rules. For example, rust
will pass a struct Foo as a Foo*. So I added some code into the adapters to
fix this (though the C ABI rules may put the pointer back, oh well).
This patch also includes a lint mode for the use of by-ref mode
in foreign functions as the semantics of this have changed.
Continuing #5140
For the sake of getting this merged I've disabled debuginfo tests on mac (where running gdb needs root). Please feel free to follow up with further improvements.
r? @graydon
This removes `log` from the language. Because we can't quite implement it as a syntax extension (probably need globals at the least) it simply renames the keyword to `__log` and hides it behind macros.
After this the only way to log is with `debug!`, `info!`, etc. I figure that if there is demand for `log!` we can add it back later.
I am not sure that we ever agreed on this course of action, though I *think* there is consensus that `log` shouldn't be a statement.
This is the first in a series of patches I'm working on to clean up the code related to `deriving`. This patch allows
```
#[deriving_eq]
#[deriving_iter_bytes]
#[deriving_clone]
struct Foo { bar: uint }
```
to be replaced with:
```
#[deriving(Eq, IterBytes, Clone)]
struct Foo { bar: uint }
```
It leaves the old attributes alone for the time being.
Eventually I'd like to incorporate the new closest-match-suggestion infrastructure for mistyped trait names, and also pass the sub-attributes to the deriving code, so that the following will be possible:
```
#[deriving(TotalOrd(qux, bar))]
struct Foo { bar: uint, baz: char, qux: int }
```
This says to derive an `impl` in which the objects' `qux` fields are compared first, followed by `bar`, while `baz` is ignored in the comparison. If no fields are specified explicitly, all fields will be compared in the order they're defined in the `struct`. This might also be useful for `Eq`. Coming soon.
This will allow you to use the `+` operator to add together any two
Options, assuming that the contents of each Option likewise implement
`+`. So Some(4) + Some(1) == Some(5), and adding with None leaves the
other value unchanged.
This might be monoidic? I don't know what that word means!
These changes make const translation use adjustments (autodereference, autoreference, bare-fn-to-closure), like normal code does, replacing some ad-hoc logic that wasn't always right.
As a convenient side-effect, explicit dereference (both of pointers and of newtypes) is also supported in const expressions.
There is also a “bonus fix” for a bug in the pretty-printer exposed by one of the added tests.
This will allow you to use the + operator to add together any two
Options, assuming that the contents of each Option likewise implement
+. So Some(4) + Some(1) == Some(5), and adding with None leaves the
other value unchanged.
This might be monoidic? I don't know what that word means!
This is due to the way different versions of gdb print out structs: older versions have them always spread out with fields on different lines, while newer versions will compactly print them on one line. This makes it hard for the output checker to verify the expected output.
r?
`log` can polymorphically log anything, but debug!, etc. requires a format string. With this patch you can equivalently write `debug!(foo)` or `debug!("%?", foo)`.
I'm doing this because I was trying to remove `log` (replacing it with nothing, at least temporarily), but there are a number of logging statements that just want to print an arbitrary value and don't care about the format string.
I'm not entirely convinced this is a good change, since it overloads the implementation of these macros and makes their usage slightly more nuanced.
The one thing `log` can still do is polymorphically log anything,
but debug!, etc. require a format string. With this patch
you can equivalently write `debug!(foo)` or `debug!("%?", foo)`
The first is reduced from a case in rustdoc (originally involving an
ARC); the other is related. No committed version has gotten these
wrong, but when I broke them it showed up only in rustdoc; there was
nothing in the test suite (or the compiler!) that failed.
The general issue is that the statics and trans have to agree on order
of evaluation, or else you get use-after-move-out-of errors at runtime.
Macro invocations with path separators (e.g. foo::bar!()) now produce a sensible error message, rather than an assertion failure. Also added compile-fail test case.
Fixes#5218 ?
I've found that unused imports can often start cluttering a project after a long time, and it's very useful to keep them under control. I don't like how Go forces a compiler error by default and it can't be changed, but I certainly want to know about them so I think that a warn is a good default.
Now that the `unused_imports` lint option is a bit smarter, I think it's possible to change the default level to warn. This commit also removes all unused imports throughout the compiler and libraries (500+).
The only odd things that I ran into were that some `use` statements had to have `#[cfg(notest)]` or `#[cfg(test)]` based on where they were. The ones with `notest` were mostly in core for modules like `cmp` whereas `cfg(test)` was for tests that weren't part of a normal `mod test` module.
The fix is straight-forward, but there are several changes
while fixing the issue.
1) disallow `mut` keyword when making a new struct
In code base, there are following code,
```rust
struct Foo { mut a: int };
let a = Foo { mut a: 1 };
```
This is because of structural record, which is
deprecated corrently (see issue #3089) In structural
record, `mut` keyword should be allowd to control
mutability. But without structural record, we don't
need to allow `mut` keyword while constructing struct.
2) disallow structural records in parser level
This is related to 1). With structural records, there
is an ambiguity between empty block and empty struct
To solve the problem, I change parser to stop parsing
structural records. I think this is not a problem,
because structural records are not compiled already.
Misc. issues
There is an ambiguity between empty struct vs. empty match stmt.
with following code,
```rust
match x{} {}
```
Two interpretation is possible, which is listed blow
```rust
match (x{}) {} // matching with newly-constructed empty struct
(match x{}) {} // matching with empty enum(or struct) x
// and then empty block
```
It seems that there is no such code in rust code base, but
there is one test which uses empty match statement:
https://github.com/mozilla/rust/blob/incoming/src/test/run-pass/issue-3037.rs
All other cases could be distinguished with look-ahead,
but this can't be. One possible solution is wrapping with
parentheses when matching with an uninhabited type.
```rust
enum what { }
fn match_with_empty(x: what) -> ~str {
match (x) { //use parentheses to remove the ambiguity
}
}
```
- Removed space between struct name and parentheses
- Fixed indentation of the rest of the file (missing end)
- Don't print parentheses for structs with no fields
- Added test
- Removed space between struct name and parentheses
- Fixed indentation of the rest of the file (missing end)
- Don't print parentheses for structs with no fields
- Added test
