We've gotten requests to move our Android support as far back as API level 9
where unfortunately the `posix_memalign` API wasn't implemented yet. Thankfully,
however, the `memalign` API was and it appears to be usable with `free` on the
Android platform (see comments included in commit).
This should help fix some of the last few test failures when compiling against
API level 9.
Refactor `FnCtxt::autoderef` to use an external iterator and to not
register any obligation from the main autoderef loop, but rather to
register them after (and if) the loop successfully completes.
Fixes#24819Fixes#25801Fixes#27631Fixes#31258Fixes#31964Fixes#32320Fixes#33515Fixes#33755
Recent versions of the Android NDK no longer ship debuggers like
`arm-linux-androideabi-gdb`, but instead one prebuilt binary `gdb`. We can
symlink this into place at least to get our detection still working, but it now
needs to be told what the sysroot is so it can correctly do... something. Long
story short, tests didn't pass with this change and after this change they pass.
Also got rid of the `trait HasMoveData`, since I am now just imposing
the constraint that `BitDenotation<Ctxt=MoveData<'tcx>>` where
necessary instead.
This makes the "shadowing labels" warning *not* print the entire loop
as a span, but only the lifetime.
Also makes #31719 go away, but does not fix its root cause (the span
of the expanded loop is still wonky, but not used anymore).
Changed toggle all sections key to `T`
Allows both `T` and `t`.
It had been [Shift]+[+] before.
In response to #33791.
cc @Manishearth
r? @GuillaumeGomez
Improve the long explanation of E0207.
The previous explanation does not seem to explain what it means for an
implementation parameter to be used or unused. The new explanation lists
the three ways specific ways by which an impl parameter becomes constrained
(taken from RFC 447).
This also adds a link to RFC 447.
The explanation has two different examples. The first is adapted from RFC 447,
and shows an instance of E0207 on a impl for a type. The second one is a trait
impl example adapted from issue #22834.
Closes#33650
cc #32777
r? @GuillaumeGomez
The current docs are a bit inconsistent. First, change all references of "recover" to "catch_unwind" because the function was renamed. Second, consistently use the term "unwind safe" instead of "panic safe", "exception safe" and "recover safe" (all these terms were used previously).
The beta builds are currently failing, unfortunately, due to what is presumably
some odd behavior with our makefiles. The wrong bootstrap key is being used to
generate the stage1 cross-compiled libraries, which fails the build.
Interestingly enough if the targets are directly specified as part of the build
then it works just fine! Just a bare `make` fails...
Instead of trying to understand what's happening in the makefiles instead just
tweak how we configure the bootstrap key in a way that's more likely to work.
Add --enable-local-rebuild to bootstrap from the current release
In Linux distributions, it is often necessary to rebuild packages for cases like applying new patches or linking against new system libraries. In this scenario, the rustc in the distro build environment may already match the current release that we're trying to rebuild. Thus we don't want to use the prior release's bootstrap key, nor `--cfg stage0` for the prior unstable features.
The new `configure --enable-local-rebuild` option specifies that we are rebuilding from the current release. The current bootstrap key is used for the local rustc, and current stage1 features are also assumed. Both the makefiles and rustbuild support this configuration.
Fixes#29556
r? @alexcrichton
Deprecate {f32,f64}::abs_sub.
The abs_sub name is misleading: the function actually computes the
positive difference (`fdim` in C), not the `(x - y).abs()` that *many* people expect
from the name.
This function can be replaced with just `(x - y).max(0.0)`, mirroring
the `abs` version, but this behaves differently with NAN: `NAN.max(0.0)
== 0.0`, while `NAN.positive_diff(0.0) == NAN`. People who absolutely
need that behaviour can use the C function directly and/or talk to the libs
team (we haven't encountered a concrete use-case for this functionality).
Closes#30315.
The previous explanation does not seem to explain what it means for an
implementation parameter to be used or unused. The new explanation lists
the three ways specific ways by which an impl parameter becomes constrained
(taken from RFC 447).
This also adds a link to RFC 447.
The explanation has two different examples. The first is adapted from RFC 447,
and shows an instance of E0207 on a impl for a type. The second one is a trait
impl example adapted from issue #22834.
Closes#33650
