Add section on common message styles for Result::expect
Based on a question from https://github.com/rust-lang/project-error-handling/issues/50#issuecomment-1092339937
~~One thing I haven't decided on yet, should I duplicate this section on `Option::expect`, link to this section, or move it somewhere else and link to that location from both docs?~~: I ended up moving the section to `std::error` and referencing it from both `Result::expect` and `Option::expect`'s docs.
I think this section, when combined with the similar update I made on [`std::panic!`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/macro.panic.html#when-to-use-panic-vs-result) implies that we should possibly more aggressively encourage and support the "expect as precondition" style described in this section. The consensus among the libs team seems to be that panic should be used for bugs, not expected potential failure modes. The "expect as error message" style seems to align better with the panic for unrecoverable errors style where they're seen as normal errors where the only difference is a desire to kill the current execution unit (aka erlang style error handling). I'm wondering if we should be providing a panic hook similar to `human-panic` or more strongly recommending the "expect as precondition" style of expect message.
Using an obviously-placeholder syntax. An RFC would still be needed before this could have any chance at stabilization, and it might be removed at any point.
But I'd really like to have it in nightly at least to ensure it works well with try_trait_v2, especially as we refactor the traits.
Rename is_{some,ok,err}_with to is_{some,ok,err}_and.
This renames `is_{some,ok,err}_with` to `is_{some,ok,err}_and`. This was discussed on the [tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93050).
This updates the standard library's documentation to use the new syntax. The
documentation is worthwhile to update as it should be more idiomatic
(particularly for features like this, which are nice for users to get acquainted
with). The general codebase is likely more hassle than benefit to update: it'll
hurt git blame, and generally updates can be done by folks updating the code if
(and when) that makes things more readable with the new format.
A few places in the compiler and library code are updated (mostly just due to
already having been done when this commit was first authored).
Just a refactor (and rename) for now, so it's not `Result`-specific.
This could be used for a future `Iterator::try_collect`, or similar, but anything like that is left for a future PR.
Make certain panicky stdlib functions behave better under panic_immediate_abort
The stdlib has a `panic_immediate_abort` feature that turns panics into immediate aborts, without any formatting/display logic. This feature was [introduced](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/55011) primarily for codesize-constrained situations.
Unfortunately, this win doesn't quite propagate to `Result::expect()` and `Result::unwrap()`, while the formatting machinery is reduced, `expect()` and `unwrap()` both call `unwrap_failed("msg", &err)` which has a signature of `fn unwrap_failed(msg: &str, error: &dyn fmt::Debug)` and is `#[inline(never)]`. This means that `unwrap_failed` will unconditionally construct a `dyn Debug` trait object even though the object is never used in the function.
Constructing a trait object (even if you never call a method on it!) forces rust to include the vtable and any dependencies. This means that in `panic_immediate_abort` mode, calling expect/unwrap on a Result will pull in a whole bunch of formatting code for the error type even if it's completely unused.
This PR swaps out the function with one that won't require a trait object such that it won't force the inclusion of vtables in the code. It also gates off `#[inline(never)]` in a bunch of other places where allowing the inlining of an abort may be useful (this kind of thing is already done elsewhere in the stdlib).
I don't know how to write a test for this; we don't really seem to have any tests for `panic_immediate_abort` anyway so perhaps it's fine as is.
Make `array::{try_from_fn, try_map}` and `Iterator::try_find` generic over `Try`
Fixes#85115
This only updates unstable functions.
`array::try_map` didn't actually exist before; this adds it under the still-open tracking issue #79711 from the old PR #79713.
Tracking issue for the new trait: #91285
This would also solve the return type question in for the proposed `Iterator::try_reduce` in #87054
Fixes 85115
This only updates unstable functions.
`array::try_map` didn't actually exist before, despite the tracking issue 79711 still being open from the old PR 79713.
Add #[must_use] to remaining core functions
I've run out of compelling reasons to group functions together across crates so I'm just going to go module-by-module. This is everything remaining from the `core` crate.
Ignored by clippy for reasons unknown:
```rust
core::alloc::Layout unsafe fn for_value_raw<T: ?Sized>(t: *const T) -> Self;
core::any const fn type_name_of_val<T: ?Sized>(_val: &T) -> &'static str;
```
Ignored by clippy because of `mut`:
```rust
str fn split_at_mut(&mut self, mid: usize) -> (&mut str, &mut str);
```
<del>
Ignored by clippy presumably because a caller might want `f` called for side effects. That seems like a bad usage of `map` to me.
```rust
core::cell::Ref<'b, T> fn map<U: ?Sized, F>(orig: Ref<'b, T>, f: F) -> Ref<'b, T>;
core::cell::Ref<'b, T> fn map_split<U: ?Sized, V: ?Sized, F>(orig: Ref<'b, T>, f: F) -> (Ref<'b, U>, Ref<'b, V>);
```
</del>
Parent issue: #89692
r? ```@joshtriplett```
