The new methodology can be found in the re-worded comment, but the gist of it is
that -C prefer-dynamic doesn't turn off static linkage. The error messages
should also be a little more sane now.
Closes#12133
The new methodology can be found in the re-worded comment, but the gist of it is
that -C prefer-dynamic doesn't turn off static linkage. The error messages
should also be a little more sane now.
Closes#12133
Work toward #9876.
This adds `prepare.mk`, which is simply a more heavily-parameterized `install.mk`, then uses `prepare` to implement both `install` and the windows installer (`dist`). Smoke tested on both Linux and Windows.
Because the build system treats Makefile.in and the .mk files slightly
differently (.in is copied, .mk are included), this makes the system
more uniform. Fewer build system changes will require a complete
reconfigure.
Currently when you run `make -jN` it's likely that you'll remove compiler-rt and
then it won't get cp'd back into the right place. I believe the reason for this
is that the compiler-rt library target never got updated so make decided it
never needed to copy the files back into place. The files were all there at the
beginning of `make`, but then we may clean out the stage0 versions if we unzip
the snapshot again.
Includes an upstream commit by pcwalton to improve codegen of our enums getting
moved around.
This also introduces a new commit on top of our stack of patches to fix a mingw32 build issue. I have submitted the patch upstream: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20140210/204653.html
I verified that this builds on the try bots, which amazes me because I think that c++11 is turned on now, but I guess we're still lucky!
Closes#10613 (pcwalton's patch landed)
Closes#11992 (llvm has removed these options)
Two unfortunate allocations were wrapping a proc() in a proc() with
GreenTask::build_start_wrapper, and then boxing this proc in a ~proc() inside of
Context::new(). Both of these allocations were a direct result from two
conditions:
1. The Context::new() function has a nice api of taking a procedure argument to
start up a new context with. This inherently required an allocation by
build_start_wrapper because extra code needed to be run around the edges of a
user-provided proc() for a new task.
2. The initial bootstrap code only understood how to pass one argument to the
next function. By modifying the assembly and entry points to understand more
than one argument, more information is passed through in registers instead of
allocating a pointer-sized context.
This is sadly where I end up throwing mips under a bus because I have no idea
what's going on in the mips context switching code and don't know how to modify
it.
Closes#7767
cc #11389
Previously crates like `green` and `native` would still depend on their
parents when running `make check-stage2-green NO_REBUILD=1`, this
ensures that they only depend on their source files.
Also, apply NO_REBUILD to the crate doc tests, so, for example,
`check-stage2-doc-std` will use an already compiled `rustdoc` directly.
These are ancient. I removed a bunch of questions that are less relevant - or completely unrelevant, updated other entries, and removed things that are already better expressed elsewhere.
libextra is currently being split into several crates. This commit adds
them all to the dist target in order to have them in the final tarballs.
Signed-off-by: Luca Bruno <lucab@debian.org>
src/README.txt has been renamed in a30d61b05a, make dist is
thus failing as unable to find it.
This commit makes the dist target working again.
Signed-off-by: Luca Bruno <lucab@debian.org>
Part of #8784
Changes:
- Everything labeled under collections in libextra has been moved into a new crate 'libcollection'.
- Renamed container.rs to deque.rs, since it was no longer 'container traits for extra', just a deque trait.
- Crates that depend on the collections have been updated and dependencies sorted.
- I think I changed all the imports in the tests to make sure it works. I'm not entirely sure, as near the end of the tests there was yet another `use` that I forgot to change, and when I went to try again, it started rebuilding everything, which I don't currently have time for.
There will probably be incompatibility between this and the other pull requests that are splitting up libextra. I'm happy to rebase once those have been merged.
The tests I didn't get to run should pass. But I can redo them another time if they don't.
This has been a long time coming. Conditions in rust were initially envisioned
as being a good alternative to error code return pattern. The idea is that all
errors are fatal-by-default, and you can opt-in to handling the error by
registering an error handler.
While sounding nice, conditions ended up having some unforseen shortcomings:
* Actually handling an error has some very awkward syntax:
let mut result = None;
let mut answer = None;
io::io_error::cond.trap(|e| { result = Some(e) }).inside(|| {
answer = Some(some_io_operation());
});
match result {
Some(err) => { /* hit an I/O error */ }
None => {
let answer = answer.unwrap();
/* deal with the result of I/O */
}
}
This pattern can certainly use functions like io::result, but at its core
actually handling conditions is fairly difficult
* The "zero value" of a function is often confusing. One of the main ideas
behind using conditions was to change the signature of I/O functions. Instead
of read_be_u32() returning a result, it returned a u32. Errors were notified
via a condition, and if you caught the condition you understood that the "zero
value" returned is actually a garbage value. These zero values are often
difficult to understand, however.
One case of this is the read_bytes() function. The function takes an integer
length of the amount of bytes to read, and returns an array of that size. The
array may actually be shorter, however, if an error occurred.
Another case is fs::stat(). The theoretical "zero value" is a blank stat
struct, but it's a little awkward to create and return a zero'd out stat
struct on a call to stat().
In general, the return value of functions that can raise error are much more
natural when using a Result as opposed to an always-usable zero-value.
* Conditions impose a necessary runtime requirement on *all* I/O. In theory I/O
is as simple as calling read() and write(), but using conditions imposed the
restriction that a rust local task was required if you wanted to catch errors
with I/O. While certainly an surmountable difficulty, this was always a bit of
a thorn in the side of conditions.
* Functions raising conditions are not always clear that they are raising
conditions. This suffers a similar problem to exceptions where you don't
actually know whether a function raises a condition or not. The documentation
likely explains, but if someone retroactively adds a condition to a function
there's nothing forcing upstream users to acknowledge a new point of task
failure.
* Libaries using I/O are not guaranteed to correctly raise on conditions when an
error occurs. In developing various I/O libraries, it's much easier to just
return `None` from a read rather than raising an error. The silent contract of
"don't raise on EOF" was a little difficult to understand and threw a wrench
into the answer of the question "when do I raise a condition?"
Many of these difficulties can be overcome through documentation, examples, and
general practice. In the end, all of these difficulties added together ended up
being too overwhelming and improving various aspects didn't end up helping that
much.
A result-based I/O error handling strategy also has shortcomings, but the
cognitive burden is much smaller. The tooling necessary to make this strategy as
usable as conditions were is much smaller than the tooling necessary for
conditions.
Perhaps conditions may manifest themselves as a future entity, but for now
we're going to remove them from the standard library.
Closes#9795Closes#8968
