[LSDA] Take ttype_index into account when taking unwind action
If `cs_action != 0`, we should check the `ttype_index` field in action record. If `ttype_index == 0`, a clean up action is taken; otherwise catch action is taken.
This can fix unwind failure on AIX which uses LLVM's libunwind by default. IIUC, rust's LSDA is borrowed from c++ and I'm assuming itanium-cxx-abi https://itanium-cxx-abi.github.io/cxx-abi/exceptions.pdf should be followed, so the fix follows what libcxxabi does. See ec48682ce9/libcxxabi/src/cxa_personality.cpp (L152) for use of `ttype_index`.
Stabilize `::{core,std}::pin::pin!`
As discussed [over here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93178#issuecomment-1295843548), it looks like a decent time to stabilize the `pin!` macro.
### Public API
```rust
// in module `core::pin`
/// API: `fn pin<T>($value: T) -> Pin<&'local mut T>`
pub macro pin($value:expr $(,)?) {
…
}
```
- Tracking issue: #93178
(now all this needs is an FCP by the proper team?)
doc: rewrite doc for signed int::{carrying_add,borrowing_sub}
Reword the documentation for bigint helper methods, signed `int::{carrying_add,borrowing_sub}` (#85532).
This change is a follow-up to #101889, which was for the unsigned methods.
std tests: use __OsLocalKeyInner from realstd
This is basically the same as https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/100201, but for __OsLocalKeyInner:
Some std tests are failing in Miri on Windows because [this static](a377893da2/library/std/src/sys/windows/thread_local_key.rs (L234-L239)) is getting duplicated, and Miri does not handle that properly -- Miri does not support this magic `.CRT$XLB` linker section, but instead just looks up this particular hard-coded static in the standard library. This PR lets the test suite use the std static instead of having its own copy.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2754
r? `@thomcc`
specialize impl of `ToString` on `bool`
Fixes#106611
Specialize `bool`s `ToString` impl by copying it from `Display`. This is a significant optimization as we avoid lots of dynamic dispatch. AFAIK, this doesn't require a API Change Proposal as this doesn't regress existing code and can be undone without regressing code.
Document that `Vec::from_raw_parts[_in]` must be given a pointer from the correct allocator.
Currently, the documentation of `Vec::from_raw_parts` and `Vec::from_raw_parts_in` says nothing about what allocator the pointer must come from. This PR adds that missing information explicitly.
Don't derive Debug for `OnceWith` & `RepeatWith`
Closures don't impl Debug, so the derived impl is kinda useless. The behavior of not debug-printing closures is consistent with the rest of the iterator adapters/sources.
Loosen the bound on the Debug implementation of Weak.
Both `rc::Weak<T>` and `sync::Weak<T>` currently require `T: Debug` in their own `Debug` implementations, but they don't currently use it; they only ever print a fixed string.
A general implementation of Debug for Weak that actually attempts to upgrade and rely on the contents is unlikely in the future because it may have unbounded recursion in the presence of reference cycles, which Weak is commonly used in. (This was the justification for why the current implementation [was implemented the way it is](f0976e2cf3)).
When I brought it up [on the forum](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/could-the-bound-on-weak-debug-be-relaxed/15504), it was suggested that, even if an implementation is specialized in the future that relies on the data stored within the Weak, it would likely rely on specialization anyway, and could therefore easily specialize on the Debug bound as well.
Update `rand` in the stdlib tests, and remove the `getrandom` feature from it.
The main goal is actually removing `getrandom`, so that eventually we can allow running the stdlib test suite on tier3 targets which don't have `getrandom` support. Currently those targets can only run the subset of stdlib tests that exist in uitests, and (generally speaking), we prefer not to test libstd functionality in uitests, which came up recently in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/104095 and https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/104185. Additionally, the fact that we can't update `rand`/`getrandom` means we're stuck with the old set of tier3 targets, so can't test new ones.
~~Anyway, I haven't checked that this actually does allow use on tier3 targets (I think it does not, as some work is needed in stdlib submodules) but it moves us slightly closer to this, and seems to allow at least finally updating our `rand` dep, which definitely improves the status quo.~~ Checked and works now.
For the most part, our tests and benchmarks are fine using hard-coded seeds. A couple tests seem to fail with this (stuff manipulating the environment expecting no collisions, for example), or become pointless (all inputs to a function become equivalent). In these cases I've done a (gross) dance (ab)using `RandomState` and `Location::caller()` for some extra "entropy".
Trying to share that code seems *way* more painful than it's worth given that the duplication is a 7-line function, even if the lines are quite gross. (Keeping in mind that sharing it would require adding `rand` as a non-dev dep to std, and exposing a type from it publicly, all of which sounds truly awful, even if done behind a perma-unstable feature).
See also some previous attempts:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/86963 (in particular https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/86963#issuecomment-885438936 which explains why this is non-trivial)
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89131
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/96626#issuecomment-1114562857 (I tried in that PR at the same time, but settled for just removing the usage of `thread_rng()` from the benchmarks, since that was the main goal).
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/104185
- Probably more. It's very tempting of a thing to "just update".
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
Improve include macro documentation
As outlined in #106118, the `include!` macro is a SEO problem when it comes to the Rust documentation. Beginners may see it as a replacement to `include` syntax in other languages. I feel like this documentation should quite explicitly link to the modules' documentation.
The primary goal of this PR is to address that issue by adding a warning to the documentation. While I was here, I also added some other parts. This included a `Uses` section and some (intra doc) links to other relevant topics.
I hope this can help beginners to Rust more quickly understand some multi-file project intricacies.
# References
- Syntax for the warning: 58accc6da3/tracing/src/lib.rs (L55)
Fix a few clippy lints in libtest
- Remove unnecessary references and dereferences
- Use `.contains` instead of `a <= x && x <= b`
- Use `mem::take` instead of `mem::replace` where possible
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/106394 :)
