https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/221
The current terminology of "task failure" often causes problems when
writing or speaking about code. You often want to talk about the
possibility of an operation that returns a Result "failing", but cannot
because of the ambiguity with task failure. Instead, you have to speak
of "the failing case" or "when the operation does not succeed" or other
circumlocutions.
Likewise, we use a "Failure" header in rustdoc to describe when
operations may fail the task, but it would often be helpful to separate
out a section describing the "Err-producing" case.
We have been steadily moving away from task failure and toward Result as
an error-handling mechanism, so we should optimize our terminology
accordingly: Result-producing functions should be easy to describe.
To update your code, rename any call to `fail!` to `panic!` instead.
Assuming you have not created your own macro named `panic!`, this
will work on UNIX based systems:
grep -lZR 'fail!' . | xargs -0 -l sed -i -e 's/fail!/panic!/g'
You can of course also do this by hand.
[breaking-change]
This change is an implementation of [RFC 69][rfc] which adds a third kind of
global to the language, `const`. This global is most similar to what the old
`static` was, and if you're unsure about what to use then you should use a
`const`.
The semantics of these three kinds of globals are:
* A `const` does not represent a memory location, but only a value. Constants
are translated as rvalues, which means that their values are directly inlined
at usage location (similar to a #define in C/C++). Constant values are, well,
constant, and can not be modified. Any "modification" is actually a
modification to a local value on the stack rather than the actual constant
itself.
Almost all values are allowed inside constants, whether they have interior
mutability or not. There are a few minor restrictions listed in the RFC, but
they should in general not come up too often.
* A `static` now always represents a memory location (unconditionally). Any
references to the same `static` are actually a reference to the same memory
location. Only values whose types ascribe to `Sync` are allowed in a `static`.
This restriction is in place because many threads may access a `static`
concurrently. Lifting this restriction (and allowing unsafe access) is a
future extension not implemented at this time.
* A `static mut` continues to always represent a memory location. All references
to a `static mut` continue to be `unsafe`.
This is a large breaking change, and many programs will need to be updated
accordingly. A summary of the breaking changes is:
* Statics may no longer be used in patterns. Statics now always represent a
memory location, which can sometimes be modified. To fix code, repurpose the
matched-on-`static` to a `const`.
static FOO: uint = 4;
match n {
FOO => { /* ... */ }
_ => { /* ... */ }
}
change this code to:
const FOO: uint = 4;
match n {
FOO => { /* ... */ }
_ => { /* ... */ }
}
* Statics may no longer refer to other statics by value. Due to statics being
able to change at runtime, allowing them to reference one another could
possibly lead to confusing semantics. If you are in this situation, use a
constant initializer instead. Note, however, that statics may reference other
statics by address, however.
* Statics may no longer be used in constant expressions, such as array lengths.
This is due to the same restrictions as listed above. Use a `const` instead.
[breaking-change]
Closes#17718
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/246
type they provide an implementation for.
This breaks code like:
mod foo {
struct Foo { ... }
}
impl foo::Foo {
...
}
Change this code to:
mod foo {
struct Foo { ... }
impl Foo {
...
}
}
Additionally, if you used the I/O path extension methods `stat`,
`lstat`, `exists`, `is_file`, or `is_dir`, note that these methods have
been moved to the the `std::io::fs::PathExtensions` trait. This breaks
code like:
fn is_it_there() -> bool {
Path::new("/foo/bar/baz").exists()
}
Change this code to:
use std::io::fs::PathExtensions;
fn is_it_there() -> bool {
Path::new("/foo/bar/baz").exists()
}
Closes#17059.
RFC #155.
[breaking-change]
This PR creates a new lint : ``unused_extern_crate``, which do pretty much the same thing as ``unused_import``, but for ``extern crate`` statements. It is related to feature request #10385.
I adapted the code tracking used imports so that it tracks extern crates usage as well. This was mainly trial and error and while I believe all cases are covered, there might be some code I added that is useless (long compile times didn't give me the opportunity to check this in detail).
Also, I removed some unused ``extern crate`` statements from the libs, that where spotted by this new lint.
This allows code to access the fields of tuples and tuple structs:
let x = (1i, 2i);
assert_eq!(x.1, 2);
struct Point(int, int);
let origin = Point(0, 0);
assert_eq!(origin.0, 0);
assert_eq!(origin.1, 0);
[breaking-change]
1. The internal layout for traits has changed from (vtable, data) to (data, vtable). If you were relying on this in unsafe transmutes, you might get some very weird and apparently unrelated errors. You should not be doing this! Prefer not to do this at all, but if you must, you should use raw::TraitObject rather than hardcoding rustc's internal representation into your code.
2. The minimal type of reference-to-vec-literals (e.g., `&[1, 2, 3]`) is now a fixed size vec (e.g., `&[int, ..3]`) where it used to be an unsized vec (e.g., `&[int]`). If you want the unszied type, you must explicitly give the type (e.g., `let x: &[_] = &[1, 2, 3]`). Note in particular where multiple blocks must have the same type (e.g., if and else clauses, vec elements), the compiler will not coerce to the unsized type without a hint. E.g., `[&[1], &[1, 2]]` used to be a valid expression of type '[&[int]]'. It no longer type checks since the first element now has type `&[int, ..1]` and the second has type &[int, ..2]` which are incompatible.
3. The type of blocks (including functions) must be coercible to the expected type (used to be a subtype). Mostly this makes things more flexible and not less (in particular, in the case of coercing function bodies to the return type). However, in some rare cases, this is less flexible. TBH, I'm not exactly sure of the exact effects. I think the change causes us to resolve inferred type variables slightly earlier which might make us slightly more restrictive. Possibly it only affects blocks with unreachable code. E.g., `if ... { fail!(); "Hello" }` used to type check, it no longer does. The fix is to add a semicolon after the string.
methods.
This paves the way to associated items by introducing an extra level of
abstraction ("impl-or-trait item") between traits/implementations and
methods. This new abstraction is encoded in the metadata and used
throughout the compiler where appropriate.
There are no functional changes; this is purely a refactoring.
For historical reasons, "Win32" has been used in Rust codebase to mean "Windows OS in general".
This is confusing, especially now, that Rust supports Win64 builds.
[breaking-change]
meaning `'b outlives 'a`. Syntax currently does nothing but is needed for full
fix to #5763. To use this syntax, the issue_5763_bootstrap feature guard is
required.
As discovered in #15460, a particular #[link(kind = "static", ...)] line is not
actually guaranteed to link the library at all. The reason for this is that if
the external library doesn't have any referenced symbols in the object generated
by rustc, the entire library is dropped by the linker.
For dynamic native libraries, this is solved by passing -lfoo for all downstream
compilations unconditionally. For static libraries in rlibs this is solved
because the entire archive is bundled in the rlib. The only situation in which
this was a problem was when a static native library was linked to a rust dynamic
library.
This commit brings the behavior of dylibs in line with rlibs by passing the
--whole-archive flag to the linker when linking native libraries. On OSX, this
uses the -force_load flag. This flag ensures that the entire archive is
considered candidate for being linked into the final dynamic library.
This is a breaking change because if any static library is included twice in the
same compilation unit then the linker will start emitting errors about duplicate
definitions now. The fix for this would involve only statically linking to a
library once.
Closes#15460
[breaking-change]
Not included are two required patches:
* LLVM: segmented stack support for DragonFly [1]
* jemalloc: simple configure patches
[1]: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4705
Not included are two required patches:
* LLVM: segmented stack support for DragonFly [1]
* jemalloc: simple configure patches
[1]: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4705
This makes edge cases in which the `Iterator` trait was not in scope
and/or `Option` or its variants were not in scope work properly.
This breaks code that looks like:
struct MyStruct { ... }
impl MyStruct {
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<int> { ... }
}
for x in MyStruct { ... } { ... }
Change ad-hoc `next` methods like the above to implementations of the
`Iterator` trait. For example:
impl Iterator<int> for MyStruct {
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<int> { ... }
}
Closes#15392.
[breaking-change]
