This commit modifies rustdoc to not require these empty modules to be public in
the standard library. The modules still remain as a location to attach
documentation to, but the modules themselves are now private (don't have to
commit to an API). The documentation for the standard library now shows all of
the primitive types on the main index page.
`TotalEq` is now just an assertion about the `Eq` impl of a
type (i.e. `==` is a total equality if a type implements `TotalEq`) so
the extra method is just confusing.
Also, a new method magically appeared as a hack to allow deriving to
assert that the contents of a struct/enum are also TotalEq, because the
deriving infrastructure makes it very hard to do anything but create a
trait method. (You didn't hear about this horrible work-around from me
:(.)
Formatting via reflection has been a little questionable for some time now, and
it's a little unfortunate that one of the standard macros will silently use
reflection when you weren't expecting it. This adds small bits of code bloat to
libraries, as well as not always being necessary. In light of this information,
this commit switches assert_eq!() to using {} in the error message instead of
{:?}.
In updating existing code, there were a few error cases that I encountered:
* It's impossible to define Show for [T, ..N]. I think DST will alleviate this
because we can define Show for [T].
* A few types here and there just needed a #[deriving(Show)]
* Type parameters needed a Show bound, I often moved this to `assert!(a == b)`
* `Path` doesn't implement `Show`, so assert_eq!() cannot be used on two paths.
I don't think this is much of a regression though because {:?} on paths looks
awful (it's a byte array).
Concretely speaking, this shaved 10K off a 656K binary. Not a lot, but sometime
significant for smaller binaries.
This commit changes the ToStr trait to:
impl<T: fmt::Show> ToStr for T {
fn to_str(&self) -> ~str { format!("{}", *self) }
}
The ToStr trait has been on the chopping block for quite awhile now, and this is
the final nail in its coffin. The trait and the corresponding method are not
being removed as part of this commit, but rather any implementations of the
`ToStr` trait are being forbidden because of the generic impl. The new way to
get the `to_str()` method to work is to implement `fmt::Show`.
Formatting into a `&mut Writer` (as `format!` does) is much more efficient than
`ToStr` when building up large strings. The `ToStr` trait forces many
intermediate allocations to be made while the `fmt::Show` trait allows
incremental buildup in the same heap allocated buffer. Additionally, the
`fmt::Show` trait is much more extensible in terms of interoperation with other
`Writer` instances and in more situations. By design the `ToStr` trait requires
at least one allocation whereas the `fmt::Show` trait does not require any
allocations.
Closes#8242Closes#9806
This "bubble up an error" macro was originally named if_ok! in order to get it
landed, but after the fact it was discovered that this name is not exactly
desirable.
The name `if_ok!` isn't immediately clear that is has much to do with error
handling, and it doesn't look fantastic in all contexts (if if_ok!(...) {}). In
general, the agreed opinion about `if_ok!` is that is came in as subpar.
The name `try!` is more invocative of error handling, it's shorter by 2 letters,
and it looks fitting in almost all circumstances. One concern about the word
`try!` is that it's too invocative of exceptions, but the belief is that this
will be overcome with documentation and examples.
Close#12037
This removes the stacking of type parameters that occurs when invoking
trait methods, and fixes all places in the standard library that were
relying on it. It is somewhat awkward in places; I think we'll probably
want something like the `Foo::<for T>::new()` syntax.
Use Eq + Ord for lexicographical ordering of sequences.
For each of <, <=, >= or > as R, use::
[x, ..xs] R [y, ..ys] = if x != y { x R y } else { xs R ys }
Previous code using `a < b` and then `!(b < a)` for short-circuiting
fails on cases such as [1.0, 2.0] < [0.0/0.0, 3.0], where the first
element was effectively considered equal.
Containers like &[T] did also implement only one comparison operator `<`,
and derived the comparison results from this. This isn't correct either for
Ord.
Implement functions in `std::iterator::order::{lt,le,gt,ge,equal,cmp}` that all
iterable containers can use for lexical order.
We also visit tuple ordering, having the same problem and same solution
(but differing implementation).
Use the definition, where R is <, <=, >=, or >
[x, ..xs] R [y, ..ys] = if x != y { x R y } else { xs R ys }
Previously, tuples would only implement < and derive the other
comparisons from it; this is incorrect. Included are several testcases
involving NaN comparisons that are now correct.
Previously, tuples would consider an element equal if both a < b and
b < a were false, this was also incorrect.
