There are hundreds of stackoverflow answers, reddit posts and blog
articles that link to these documents, so it's a nicer user experience
if they're not plain 404s.
The intention is to let these hang around only for relatively short
while. The alpha is likely to bring in many new users and they will be
reading the documents mentioned above.
This pulls all of our long-form documentation into a single document,
nicknamed "the book" and formally titled "The Rust Programming
Language."
A few things motivated this change:
* People knew of The Guide, but not the individual Guides. This merges
them together, helping discoverability.
* You can get all of Rust's longform documentation in one place, which
is nice.
* We now have rustbook in-tree, which can generate this kind of
documentation. While its style is basic, the general idea is much
better: a table of contents on the left-hand side.
* Rather than a almost 10,000-line guide.md, there are now smaller files
per section.
followed by a semicolon.
This allows code like `vec![1i, 2, 3].len();` to work.
This breaks code that uses macros as statements without putting
semicolons after them, such as:
fn main() {
...
assert!(a == b)
assert!(c == d)
println(...);
}
It also breaks code that uses macros as items without semicolons:
local_data_key!(foo)
fn main() {
println("hello world")
}
Add semicolons to fix this code. Those two examples can be fixed as
follows:
fn main() {
...
assert!(a == b);
assert!(c == d);
println(...);
}
local_data_key!(foo);
fn main() {
println("hello world")
}
RFC #378.
Closes#18635.
[breaking-change]
This breaks code that referred to variant names in the same namespace as
their enum. Reexport the variants in the old location or alter code to
refer to the new locations:
```
pub enum Foo {
A,
B
}
fn main() {
let a = A;
}
```
=>
```
pub use self::Foo::{A, B};
pub enum Foo {
A,
B
}
fn main() {
let a = A;
}
```
or
```
pub enum Foo {
A,
B
}
fn main() {
let a = Foo::A;
}
```
[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]
Added allow(non_camel_case_types) to librustc where necesary
Tried to fix problems with non_camel_case_types outside rustc
fixed failing tests
Docs updated
Moved #[allow(non_camel_case_types)] a level higher.
markdown.rs reverted
Fixed timer that was failing tests
Fixed another timer
