* Changed btree_map's and hash_map's Entry (etc.) docs to be consistent
* Changed VecDeque's type and module summary sentences to be consistent
with each other as well as with other summary sentences in the module
* Changed HashMap's and HashSet's summary sentences to be less redundantly
phrased and also more consistant with the other summary sentences in the
module
* Also, added an example to Bound
* Added links where possible (limited because of facading)
* Changed references to methods from `foo()` to `foo` in module docs
* Changed references to methods from `HashMap::foo` to just `foo` in
top-level docs for `HashMap` and the `default` doc for `DefaultHasher`
* Various small other fixes
* Store capacity_mask instead of capacity
* Move bucket index into RawBucket
* Bucket index is now always within [0..table_capacity)
* Clone RawTable using RawBucket
* Simplify iterators by moving logic into RawBuckets
* Make retain aware of the number of elements
This replaces the `std::collections:#️⃣:table::RevMoveBuckets`
iterator with a simpler `while` loop. This iterator was only used for
dropping the remaining elements of a `RawTable`, so instead we can just
loop through directly and drop them in place.
This should be functionally equivalent to the former code, but a little
easier to read. I was hoping it might have some performance benefit
too, but it seems the optimizer was already good enough to see through
the iterator -- the generated code is nearly the same. Maybe it will
still help if an element type has more complicated drop code.
Fix a spelling error in HashMap documentation, and slightly reword surrounding text for precision
Noticed while reading docs just now.
It's possible that the prior wording *meant* to state that the seed's randomness depends on the exact instant that the system RNG was created, I guess. But unless there's an API guarantee that this is the case, the wording seems over-precise. Is there a formal API guarantee that would forbid, say, the system RNG from generating all output using the Intel RDRAND instruction? I don't think the quality of output in that case would depend on when the RNG was created. Yet it seems to me like it could well be a valid source of randomness when computing the initial seed.
For that reason, tying the randomness of the seed, to the quality of the RNG's output *at the precise instant the seed is computed*, seems less confining. That instantaneous quality level could be determined by the quality at the instant the RNG was created -- but instantaneous quality need not be low for that precise reason.
Smarter HashMap/HashSet pre-allocation for extend/from_iter
HashMap/HashSet from_iter and extend are making totally different assumptions.
A more balanced decision may allocate half the lower hint (rounding up). For "well defined" iterators this effectively limits the worst case to two resizes (the initial reserve + one resize).
cc #36579
cc @bluss
hashmap: Store hashes as usize internally
We can't use more than usize's bits of a hash to select a bucket anyway,
so we only need to store that part in the table. This should be an
improvement for the size of the data structure on 32-bit platforms.
Smaller data means better cache utilization and hopefully better
performance.
Fixes#36567
This is overdue, even if range and RangeArgument is still unstable.
The stability attributes are the same ones as the other unstable item
(Bound) here, they don't seem to matter.
We can't use more than usize's bits of a hash to select a bucket anyway,
so we only need to store that part in the table. This should be an
improvement for the size of the data structure on 32-bit platforms.
Smaller data means better cache utilization and hopefully better
performance.
