r? @nikomatsakis Impls can implement either zero or one traits; this has been true
more or less since we removed classes. So I got rid of the comments
saying "we should support multiple traits" and changed the code to
make it clear that we don't. This is just cleanup, and doesn't break
any existing tests.
Impls can implement either zero or one traits; this has been true
more or less since we removed classes. So I got rid of the comments
saying "we should support multiple traits" and changed the code to
make it clear that we don't. This is just cleanup, and doesn't break
any existing tests.
`str::from_slice` and `vec::from_slice` are changed to `str::to_owned` and `vec::to_owned`. (#6389)
Replace `at_vec::from_owned` and `at_vec::from_slice` with `at_vec::to_managed_consume` and `at_vec::to_managed`.
Replace all instances of #[auto_*code] with the appropriate #[deriving] attribute
and remove the majority of the actual auto_* code, leaving stubs to refer the user to
the new syntax.
Also, moves the useful contents of auto_encode.rs to more appropriate spots: tests and comments to deriving/encodable.rs, and the ExtCtxtMethods trait to build.rs (unused so far, but the method syntax might be nicer than using the mk_* fns in many instances).
Replace all instances of #[auto_*code] with the appropriate #[deriving] attribute
and remove the majority of the actual code, leaving stubs to refer the user to
the new syntax.
fail!() used to require owned strings but can handle static strings
now. Also, it can pass its arguments to fmt!() on its own, no need for
the caller to call fmt!() itself.
When trying to import nonexistent items from existing modules, specify that
that is what happened, rather than just reporting "unresolved name".
Ideally the error would be reported on the span of the import... but I do not see a way to get a span there. Help appreciated 😄
This pull request adds 4 atomic intrinsics to the compiler, in preparation for #5042.
* `atomic_load(src: &int) -> int` performs an atomic sequentially consistent load.
* `atomic_load_acq(src: &int) -> int` performs an atomic acquiring load.
* `atomic_store(dst: &mut int, val: int)` performs an atomic sequentially consistent store.
* `atomic_store_rel(dst: &mut int, val: int)` performs an atomic releasing store.
For more information about the whole acquire/release thing: http://llvm.org/docs/Atomics.html
r?
Every unresolved import is reported. An additional error message isn't useful
and obscures (imo) the real errors: I need to take it into account when
looking at the error count.
The default versions (atomic_load and atomic_store) are sequentially consistent.
The atomic_load_acq intrinsic acquires as described in [1].
The atomic_store_rel intrinsic releases as described in [1].
[1]: http://llvm.org/docs/Atomics.html
r? @nikomatsakis In #6319, several people mentioned they ran into a "computing
fictitious type" ICE in trans. This turns out to be because some
of my recent changes to typeck::check::_match resulted in type errors
getting reported with ty_err as the expected type, which meant the errors
were suppressed, and typechecking incorrectly succeeded (since the errors
weren't recorded).
Changed the error messages in these cases not to use an expected type at all,
rather, printing out a string describing the type that was expected (which is
what the code originally did). The result is a bit repetitive and the
proliferation of error-reporting functions in typeck::infer is a bit annoying,
but I thought it was important to fix this now; more cleanup can happen later.
In #6319, several people mentioned they ran into a "computing
fictitious type" ICE in trans. This turns out to be because some
of my recent changes to typeck::check::_match resulted in type errors
getting reported with ty_err as the expected type, which meant the errors
were suppressed, and typechecking incorrectly succeeded (since the errors
weren't recorded).
Changed the error messages in these cases not to use an expected type at all,
rather, printing out a string describing the type that was expected (which is
what the code originally did). The result is a bit repetitive and the
proliferation of error-reporting functions in typeck::infer is a bit annoying,
but I thought it was important to fix this now; more cleanup can happen later.
**Caveat**: With the current commit, this check only works for `match`s, the checks (incorrectly) do not run for patterns in `let`s, and invalid/unsafe code compiles.
I don't know how to fix this, I experimented with some things to try to make let patterns and match patterns run on the same code (since this would presumably fix many of the other unsoundness issues of let-patterns, e.g. #6225), but I don't understand enough of the code. (I think I heard someone talking about a fix for `let` being in progress?)
Fixes#6344 and #6341.
Closes#6183.
The first commit changes the compiler's method of treating a `for` loop, and all the remaining commits are just dealing with the fallout.
The biggest fallout was the `IterBytes` trait, although it's really a whole lot nicer now because all of the `iter_bytes_XX` methods are just and-ed together. Sadly there was a huge amount of stuff that's `cfg(stage0)` gated, but whoever lands the next snapshot is going to have a lot of fun deleting all this code!
