This commit does two things:
* Re-works the module-level documentation.
* Cleaning up wording and adding links to where error types are used.
Part of #29364
After [considerable
pushback](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1451), it's clear
that there is a community consensus around providing `IpAddr` in the
standard library, together with other APIs using it.
This commit reverts from deprecated status directly to stable. The
deprecation landed in 1.6, which has already been released, so the
stabilization is marked for 1.7 (currently in beta; will require a backport).
Since a lexicographic ordering of a struct could vary based on which struct members are compared first, I ended up doing some testing to ensure that the behavior when deriving these traits was what I expected (ordered based on the top to bottom order of declaration of the members). I wanted to add this little bit of documentation to potentially save someone else the same effort. That is, assuming that my testing correctly reflects the intended behavior of the compiler.
r? @steveklabnik
The comment in the next line was already talking about `_guard`, and the scope guard a couple lines further down is also called `guard`, so I assume that was just a typo.
r? @steveklabnik
When I last did a pass through the string documentation, I focused on
consistency across similar functions. Unfortunately, I missed some
details. This example was _too_ consistent: it wasn't actually accurate!
This commit fixes the docs do both be more accurate and to explain why
the return type is a Cow<'a, str>.
First reported here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/44q9ms/stringfrom_utf8_lossy_doesnt_return_a_string/
This commit is an implementation of the new compiler flags required by [RFC
1361][rfc]. This specifically adds a new `cfg` option to the `--print` flag to
the compiler. This new directive will print the defined `#[cfg]` directives by
the compiler for the target in question.
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1361-cargo-cfg-dependencies
This commit is an implementation of the new compiler flags required by [RFC
1361][rfc]. This specifically adds a new `cfg` option to the `--print` flag to
the compiler. This new directive will print the defined `#[cfg]` directives by
the compiler for the target in question.
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1361-cargo-cfg-dependencies.md
The documentation for the `make_mut` function on `Arc<T>` contains a somewhat impenetrable double-negative that I was only able to fully grasp by looking at the implementation. Here's a quick rewrite that reads a lot better.
The sentence "doesn't have one strong reference and no weak references." is a
hard to understand, and it can be much more easily explained. In particular, such a double-negative
could give English as a Second Language users even more trouble than native speakers.
r? @steveklabnik
A spec like `#[cfg(foo(bar))]` is not allowed as an attribute. This
makes the same spec be rejected by the compiler if passed in as a
`--cfg` argument.
Fixes#31495
When I last did a pass through the string documentation, I focused on
consistency across similar functions. Unfortunately, I missed some
details. This example was _too_ consistent: it wasn't actually accurate!
This commit fixes the docs do both be more accurate and to explain why
the return type is a Cow<'a, str>.
First reported here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/44q9ms/stringfrom_utf8_lossy_doesnt_return_a_string/
* We don't have SEH-based unwinding yet.
For this reason we don't need operand bundles in MIR trans.
* Refactored some uses of fcx.
* Refactored some calls to `with_block`.
Previously when breaking tokens into smaller pieces, the replace_token
function have been used. It replaced current token and updated span
information, but it did not clear the list of expected tokens, neither
did it update remaining info about last token. This could lead to
incorrect error message, like one described in the issue #24780:
expected one of ... `>` ... found `>`
This allows printing pointers to unsized types with the {:p} formatting
directive. The following impls are extended to unsized types:
- impl<'a, T: ?Sized> Pointer for &'a T
- impl<'a, T: ?Sized> Pointer for &'a mut T
- impl<T: ?Sized> Pointer for *const T
- impl<T: ?Sized> Pointer for *mut T
- impl<T: ?Sized> fmt::Pointer for Box<T>
- impl<T: ?Sized> fmt::Pointer for Rc<T>
- impl<T: ?Sized> fmt::Pointer for Arc<T>
Having a `MirPass` provides literally no benefits over `MutVisitor`. Moreover using `MirPass` for
`EraseRegions` basically makes the programmer to fix breakage from changing repr twice – in the
visitor and eraseregions. Since `MutVisitor` implements all the “walking” inside the trait, that can
be reused for `EraseRegions` too, basically resulting in less code duplication.
The compiler currently vendors its own version of "llvm-ar" (not literally the
binary but rather the library support) and uses it for all major targets by
default (e.g. everything defined in `src/librustc_back/target`). All custom
target specs, however, still search for an `ar` tool by default. This commit
changes this default behavior to using the internally bundled llvm-ar with the
GNU format.
Currently all targets use the GNU format except for OSX which uses the BSD
format (surely makes sense, right?), and custom targets can change the format
via the `archive-format` key in custom target specs.
I suspect that we can outright remove support for invoking an external `ar`
utility, but I figure for now there may be some crazy target relying on that so
we should leave support in for now.
The comment in the next line was already talking about `_guard`, and the
scope guard a couple lines further down is also called `guard`, so I
assume that was just a typo.
Why do this: The RegionGraph representation previously conflated all
of the non-variable regions (i.e. the concrete regions such as
lifetime parameters to the current function) into a single dummy node.
A single dummy node leads DFS on a graph `'a -> '_#1 -> '_#0 -> 'b` to
claim that `'_#1` is reachable from `'_#0` (due to `'a` and `'b` being
conflated in the graph representation), which is incorrect (and can
lead to soundness bugs later on in compilation, see #30438).
Splitting the dummy node ensures that DFS will never introduce new
ancestor relationships between nodes for variable regions in the
graph.
