Doc formating consistency between slice sort and sort_unstable, and big O notation consistency
Updated documentation for slice sorting methods to be consistent between stable and unstable versions, which just ended up being minor formatting differences.
I also went through and updated any doc comments with big O notation to be consistent with #74010 by italicizing them rather than having them in a code block.
Fixing escaping to ensure generation of welformed json.
doc tests' json name have a filename in them. When json test output is asked for on windows currently produces invalid json.
Tracking issue for json test output: #49359
Implement TryFrom between NonZero types.
This will instantly be stable, as trait implementations for stable types and traits can not be `#[unstable]`.
Closes#77258.
@rustbot modify labels: +T-libs
Improve wording of "cannot multiply" type error
For example, if you had this code:
fn foo(x: i32, y: f32) -> f32 {
x * y
}
You would get this error:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `f32` to `i32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
However, that's not usually how people describe multiplication. People
usually describe multiplication like how the division error words it:
error[E0277]: cannot divide `i32` by `f32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x / y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 / f32`
|
= help: the trait `Div<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
So that's what this change does. It changes this:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `f32` to `i32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
To this:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `i32` by `f32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
Add Pin::static_ref, static_mut.
This adds `Pin::static_ref` and `Pin::static_mut`, which convert a static reference to a pinned static reference.
Static references are effectively already pinned, as what they refer to has to live forever and can never be moved.
---
Context: I want to update the `sys` and `sys_common` mutexes/rwlocks/condvars to use `Pin<&self>` in their functions, instead of only warning in the unsafety comments that they may not be moved. That should make them a little bit less dangerous to use. Putting such an object in a `static` (e.g. through `sys_common::StaticMutex`) fulfills the requirements about never moving it, but right now there's no safe way to get a `Pin<&T>` to a `static`. This solves that.
Wrapping intrinsics doc links update.
The links in the wrapping intrinsics docs now refer to the `wrapping_*` functions, not the `checked_*` functions.
const keyword: brief paragraph on 'const fn'
`const fn` were mentioned in the title, but called "deterministic functions" which is not their main property (though at least currently it is a consequence of being const-evaluable). This adds a brief paragraph discussing them, also in the hopes of clarifying that they do *not* have any effect on run-time uses.
Assert that pthread mutex initialization succeeded
If pthread mutex initialization fails, the failure will go unnoticed unless
debug assertions are enabled. Any subsequent use of mutex will also silently
fail, since return values from lock & unlock operations are similarly checked
only through debug assertions.
In some implementations the mutex initialization requires a memory
allocation and so it does fail in practice.
Assert that initialization succeeds to ensure that mutex guarantees
mutual exclusion.
Fixes#34966.
If pthread mutex initialization fails, the failure will go unnoticed unless
debug assertions are enabled. Any subsequent use of mutex will also silently
fail, since return values from lock & unlock operations are similarly checked
only through debug assertions.
In some implementations the mutex initialization requires a memory
allocation and so it does fail in practice.
Check that initialization succeeds to ensure that mutex guarantees
mutual exclusion.
Move `slice::check_range` to `RangeBounds`
Since this method doesn't take a slice anymore (#76662), it makes more sense to define it on `RangeBounds`.
Questions:
- Should the new method be `assert_len` or `assert_length`?
For example, if you had this code:
fn foo(x: i32, y: f32) -> f32 {
x * y
}
You would get this error:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `f32` to `i32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
However, that's not usually how people describe multiplication. People
usually describe multiplication like how the division error words it:
error[E0277]: cannot divide `i32` by `f32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x / y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 / f32`
|
= help: the trait `Div<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
So that's what this change does. It changes this:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `f32` to `i32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
To this:
error[E0277]: cannot multiply `i32` by `f32`
--> src/lib.rs:2:7
|
2 | x * y
| ^ no implementation for `i32 * f32`
|
= help: the trait `Mul<f32>` is not implemented for `i32`
Add std:🧵:available_concurrency
This PR adds a counterpart to [C++'s `std:🧵:hardware_concurrency`](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/thread/thread/hardware_concurrency) to Rust, tracking issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/74479.
cc/ `@rust-lang/libs`
## Motivation
Being able to know how many hardware threads a platform supports is a core part of building multi-threaded code. In C++ 11 this has become available through the [`std:🧵:hardware_concurrency`](https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/thread/thread/hardware_concurrency) API. Currently in Rust most of the ecosystem depends on the [`num_cpus` crate](https://docs.rs/num_cpus/1.13.0/num_cpus/) ([no.35 in top 500 crates](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wwahRMHG3buvnfHjmPQFU4Kyfq15oTwbfsuZpwHUKc4/edit#gid=1253069234)) to provide this functionality. This PR proposes an API to provide access to the number of hardware threads available on a given platform.
__edit (2020-07-24):__ The purpose of this PR is to provide a hint for how many threads to spawn to saturate the processor. There's value in introducing APIs for NUMA and Windows processor groups, but those are intentionally out of scope for this PR. See: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74480#issuecomment-662116186.
## Naming
Discussing the naming of the API on Zulip surfaced two options:
- `std:🧵:hardware_concurrency`
- `std:🧵:hardware_threads`
Both options seemed acceptable, but overall people seem to gravitate the most towards `hardware_threads`. Additionally `@jonas-schievink` pointed out that the "hardware threads" terminology is well-established and is used in among other the [RISC-V specification](https://riscv.org/specifications/isa-spec-pdf/) (page 20):
> A component is termed a core if it contains an independent instruction fetch unit. A RISC-V-compatible core might support multiple RISC-V-compatible __hardware threads__, or harts, through multithreading.
It's also worth noting that [the original paper introducing C++'s `std::thread` submodule](http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2320.html) unfortunately doesn't feature any discussion on the naming of `hardware_concurrency`, so we can't use that to help inform our decision here.
## Return type
An important consideration `@joshtriplett` brought up is that we don't want to default to `1` for platforms where the number of available threads cannot be retrieved. Instead we want to inform the users of the fact that we don't know and allow them to handle that case. Which is why this PR uses `Option<NonZeroUsize>` as its return type, where `None` is returned on platforms where we don't know the number of hardware threads available.
The reasoning for `NonZeroUsize` vs `usize` is that if the number of threads for a platform are known, they'll always be at least 1. As evidenced by the example the `NonZero*` family of APIs may currently not be the most ergonomic to use, but improving the ergonomics of them is something that I think we can address separately.
## Implementation
`@Mark-Simulacrum` pointed out that most of the code we wanted to expose here was already available under `libtest`. So this PR mostly moves the internal code of libtest into a public API.
BTreeMap: refactor Entry out of map.rs into its own file
btree/map.rs is approaching the 3000 line mark, splitting out the entry
code buys about 500 lines of headroom.
I've created this PR because the changes I've made in #77438 will push `map.rs` over the 3000 line limit and cause tidy to complain.
I picked `Entry` to factor out because it feels less tightly coupled to the rest of `BTreeMap` than the various iterator implementations.
Related: #60302
Use posix_spawn() on unix if program is a path
Previously `Command::spawn` would fall back to the non-posix_spawn based
implementation if the `PATH` environment variable was possibly changed.
On systems with a modern (g)libc `posix_spawn()` can be significantly
faster. If program is a path itself the `PATH` environment variable is
not used for the lookup and it should be safe to use the
`posix_spawnp()` method. [1]
We found this, because we have a cli application that effectively runs a
lot of subprocesses. It would sometimes noticeably hang while printing
output. Profiling showed that the process was spending the majority of
time in the kernel's `copy_page_range` function while spawning
subprocesses. During this time the process is completely blocked from
running, explaining why users were reporting the cli app hanging.
Through this we discovered that `std::process::Command` has a fast and
slow path for process execution. The fast path is backed by
`posix_spawnp()` and the slow path by fork/exec syscalls being called
explicitly. Using fork for process creation is supposed to be fast, but
it slows down as your process uses more memory. It's not because the
kernel copies the actual memory from the parent, but it does need to
copy the references to it (see `copy_page_range` above!). We ended up
using the slow path, because the command spawn implementation in falls
back to the slow path if it suspects the PATH environment variable was
changed.
Here is a smallish program demonstrating the slowdown before this code
change:
```
use std::process::Command;
use std::time::Instant;
fn main() {
let mut args = std::env::args().skip(1);
if let Some(size) = args.next() {
// Allocate some memory
let _xs: Vec<_> = std::iter::repeat(0)
.take(size.parse().expect("valid number"))
.collect();
let mut command = Command::new("/bin/sh");
command
.arg("-c")
.arg("echo hello");
if args.next().is_some() {
println!("Overriding PATH");
command.env("PATH", std::env::var("PATH").expect("PATH env var"));
}
let now = Instant::now();
let child = command
.spawn()
.expect("failed to execute process");
println!("Spawn took: {:?}", now.elapsed());
let output = child.wait_with_output().expect("failed to wait on process");
println!("Output: {:?}", output);
} else {
eprintln!("Usage: prog [size]");
std::process::exit(1);
}
()
}
```
Running it and passing different amounts of elements to use to allocate
memory shows that the time taken for `spawn()` can differ quite
significantly. In latter case the `posix_spawnp()` implementation is 30x
faster:
```
$ cargo run --release 10000000
...
Spawn took: 324.275µs
hello
$ cargo run --release 10000000 changepath
...
Overriding PATH
Spawn took: 2.346809ms
hello
$ cargo run --release 100000000
...
Spawn took: 387.842µs
hello
$ cargo run --release 100000000 changepath
...
Overriding PATH
Spawn took: 13.434677ms
hello
```
[1]: 5f72f9800b/posix/execvpe.c (L81)
BTreeMap: improve gdb introspection of BTreeMap with ZST keys or values
I accidentally pushed an earlier revision in #77788: it changes the index of tuples for BTreeSet from ""[{}]".format(i) to "key{}".format(i). Which doesn't seem to make the slightest difference on my linux box nor on CI. In fact, gdb doesn't make any distinction between "key{}" and "val{}" for a BTreeMap either, leading to confusing output if you test more. But easy to improve.
r? @Mark-Simulacrum
liballoc: VecDeque: Add binary search functions
I am submitting rust-lang/rfcs#2997 as a PR as suggested by @scottmcm
I haven't yet created a tracking issue - if there's a favorable feedback I'll create one and update the issue links in the unstable attribs.
Remove shrink_to_fit from default ToString::to_string implementation.
As suggested by `@scottmcm` on Zulip. shrink_to_fit() seems like the wrong thing to do here in most use cases of to_string(). Would be intereseting to see if it makes any difference in a timer run.
r? `@joshtriplett`
Deny broken intra-doc links in linkchecker
Since rustdoc isn't warning about these links, check for them manually.
This also fixes the broken links that popped up from the lint.
stabilize union with 'ManuallyDrop' fields and 'impl Drop for Union'
As [discussed by @SimonSapin and @withoutboats](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/55149#issuecomment-634692020), this PR proposes to stabilize parts of the `untagged_union` feature gate:
* It will be possible to have a union with field type `ManuallyDrop<T>` for any `T`.
* While at it I propose we also stabilize `impl Drop for Union`; to my knowledge, there are no open concerns around this feature.
In the RFC discussion, we also talked about allowing `&mut T` as another non-`Copy` non-dropping type, but that felt to me like an overly specific exception so I figured we'd wait if there is actually any use for such a special case.
Some things remain unstable and still require the `untagged_union` feature gate:
* Union with fields that do not drop, are not `Copy`, and are not `ManuallyDrop<_>`. The reason to not stabilize this is to avoid semver concerns around libraries adding `Drop` implementations later. (This is already not fully semver compatible as, to my knowledge, the borrow checker will exploit the non-dropping nature of any type, but it seems prudent to avoid further increasing the amount of trouble adding an `impl Drop` can cause.)
Due to this, quite a few tests still need the `untagged_union` feature, but I think the ones where I could remove the feature flag provide good test coverage for the stable part.
Cc @rust-lang/lang
