The `print!` and `println!` macros are now the preferred method of printing, and so there is no reason to export the `stdio` functions in the prelude. The functions have also been replaced by their macro counterparts in the tutorial and other documentation so that newcomers don't get confused about what they should be using.
The `print!` and `println!` macros are now the preferred method of printing, and so there is no reason to export the `stdio` functions in the prelude. The functions have also been replaced by their macro counterparts in the tutorial and other documentation so that newcomers don't get confused about what they should be using.
So far the following code
```
struct Foo;
fn main() {
let mut t = Foo;
let ref b = Foo;
a += *b;
}
```
errors with
```
test.rs:15:3: 13:11 error: binary operation + cannot be applied to type `Foo`
test.rs:15 *a += *b;
```
Since assignment-operators are no longer expanded to ```left = left OP right``` but are independents operators it should be
```
test.rs:15:3: 13:11 error: binary operation += cannot be applied to type `Foo`
test.rs:15 *a += *b;
```
to make it clear that implementing Add for Foo is not gonna work. (cf issues #11143, #11344)
Besides that, we also need to typecheck the rhs expression even if the operator has no implementation, or we end up with unknown types for the nodes of the rhs and an ICE later on while resolving types. (once again cf #11143 and #11344).
This probably would get fixed with #5992, but in the meantime it's a confusing error to stumble upon.
@pcwalton, you wrote the original code, what do you think?
(closes#11143 and #11344)
That is, if you have an enum type that is subject to the nullable
pointer optimization, but the null variant has a nonzero number of
fields, and you declare a static whose value is of that variant, then
that used to be an ICE but this change fixes it.
That is, if you have an enum type that is subject to the nullable
pointer optimization, but the null variant has a nonzero number of
fields, and you declare a static whose value is of that variant, then
that used to be an ICE but this change fixes it.
This is just an unnecessary trait that no one's ever going to parameterize over
and it's more useful to just define the methods directly on the types
themselves. The implementors of this type almost always don't want
inner_mut_ref() but they're forced to define it as well.
So, like I mentioned in issue #10955 it doesn't seem like we need to call ```ty::subst_tps``` when the method is generic. But then I realized that this function doesn't mutate any of its input, and the return value is unused. Plus the type param substitution seems to be taken care of in ```trans_fn_ref_with_vtables```, so I thought I'd just try to remove it. As far as I can tell everything works.
This closes#10955.
This is just an unnecessary trait that no one's ever going to parameterize over
and it's more useful to just define the methods directly on the types
themselves. The implementors of this type almost always don't want
inner_mut_ref() but they're forced to define it as well.
If a reexport comes from a non-public module, then the documentation for the
reexport will be inlined into the module that exports it, but if the reexport is
targeted at a public type (like the prelude), then it is not inlined but rather
hyperlinked.
If a reexport comes from a non-public module, then the documentation for the
reexport will be inlined into the module that exports it, but if the reexport is
targeted at a public type (like the prelude), then it is not inlined but rather
hyperlinked.
