Removes all target-specific knowledge from rustc. Some targets have changed
during this, but none of these should be very visible outside of
cross-compilation. The changes make our targets more consistent.
iX86-unknown-linux-gnu is now only available as i686-unknown-linux-gnu. We
used to accept any value of X greater than 1. i686 was released in 1995, and
should encompass the bare minimum of what Rust supports on x86 CPUs.
The only two windows targets are now i686-pc-windows-gnu and
x86_64-pc-windows-gnu.
The iOS target has been renamed from arm-apple-ios to arm-apple-darwin.
A complete list of the targets we accept now:
arm-apple-darwin
arm-linux-androideabi
arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi
arm-unknown-linux-gnueabihf
i686-apple-darwin
i686-pc-windows-gnu
i686-unknown-freebsd
i686-unknown-linux-gnu
mips-unknown-linux-gnu
mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu
x86_64-apple-darwin
x86_64-unknown-freebsd
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
x86_64-pc-windows-gnu
Closes#16093
[breaking-change]
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/221
The current terminology of "task failure" often causes problems when
writing or speaking about code. You often want to talk about the
possibility of an operation that returns a Result "failing", but cannot
because of the ambiguity with task failure. Instead, you have to speak
of "the failing case" or "when the operation does not succeed" or other
circumlocutions.
Likewise, we use a "Failure" header in rustdoc to describe when
operations may fail the task, but it would often be helpful to separate
out a section describing the "Err-producing" case.
We have been steadily moving away from task failure and toward Result as
an error-handling mechanism, so we should optimize our terminology
accordingly: Result-producing functions should be easy to describe.
To update your code, rename any call to `fail!` to `panic!` instead.
Assuming you have not created your own macro named `panic!`, this
will work on UNIX based systems:
grep -lZR 'fail!' . | xargs -0 -l sed -i -e 's/fail!/panic!/g'
You can of course also do this by hand.
[breaking-change]
This change is an implementation of [RFC 69][rfc] which adds a third kind of
global to the language, `const`. This global is most similar to what the old
`static` was, and if you're unsure about what to use then you should use a
`const`.
The semantics of these three kinds of globals are:
* A `const` does not represent a memory location, but only a value. Constants
are translated as rvalues, which means that their values are directly inlined
at usage location (similar to a #define in C/C++). Constant values are, well,
constant, and can not be modified. Any "modification" is actually a
modification to a local value on the stack rather than the actual constant
itself.
Almost all values are allowed inside constants, whether they have interior
mutability or not. There are a few minor restrictions listed in the RFC, but
they should in general not come up too often.
* A `static` now always represents a memory location (unconditionally). Any
references to the same `static` are actually a reference to the same memory
location. Only values whose types ascribe to `Sync` are allowed in a `static`.
This restriction is in place because many threads may access a `static`
concurrently. Lifting this restriction (and allowing unsafe access) is a
future extension not implemented at this time.
* A `static mut` continues to always represent a memory location. All references
to a `static mut` continue to be `unsafe`.
This is a large breaking change, and many programs will need to be updated
accordingly. A summary of the breaking changes is:
* Statics may no longer be used in patterns. Statics now always represent a
memory location, which can sometimes be modified. To fix code, repurpose the
matched-on-`static` to a `const`.
static FOO: uint = 4;
match n {
FOO => { /* ... */ }
_ => { /* ... */ }
}
change this code to:
const FOO: uint = 4;
match n {
FOO => { /* ... */ }
_ => { /* ... */ }
}
* Statics may no longer refer to other statics by value. Due to statics being
able to change at runtime, allowing them to reference one another could
possibly lead to confusing semantics. If you are in this situation, use a
constant initializer instead. Note, however, that statics may reference other
statics by address, however.
* Statics may no longer be used in constant expressions, such as array lengths.
This is due to the same restrictions as listed above. Use a `const` instead.
[breaking-change]
Closes#17718
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/246
type they provide an implementation for.
This breaks code like:
mod foo {
struct Foo { ... }
}
impl foo::Foo {
...
}
Change this code to:
mod foo {
struct Foo { ... }
impl Foo {
...
}
}
Additionally, if you used the I/O path extension methods `stat`,
`lstat`, `exists`, `is_file`, or `is_dir`, note that these methods have
been moved to the the `std::io::fs::PathExtensions` trait. This breaks
code like:
fn is_it_there() -> bool {
Path::new("/foo/bar/baz").exists()
}
Change this code to:
use std::io::fs::PathExtensions;
fn is_it_there() -> bool {
Path::new("/foo/bar/baz").exists()
}
Closes#17059.
RFC #155.
[breaking-change]
This PR creates a new lint : ``unused_extern_crate``, which do pretty much the same thing as ``unused_import``, but for ``extern crate`` statements. It is related to feature request #10385.
I adapted the code tracking used imports so that it tracks extern crates usage as well. This was mainly trial and error and while I believe all cases are covered, there might be some code I added that is useless (long compile times didn't give me the opportunity to check this in detail).
Also, I removed some unused ``extern crate`` statements from the libs, that where spotted by this new lint.
