Deprecate atomic::spin_loop_hint in favour of hint::spin_loop
For https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/55002
We wanted to leave `atomic::spin_loop_hint` alone when stabilizing `hint::spin_loop` so folks had some time to migrate. This now deprecates `atomic_spin_loop_hint`.
Add Iterator::intersperse_with
This is a follow-up to #79479, tracking in #79524, as discussed https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79479#issuecomment-752671731.
~~Note that I had to manually implement `Clone` and `Debug` because `derive` insists on placing a `Clone`-bound on the struct-definition, which is too narrow. There is a long-standing issue # for this somewhere around here :-)~~
Also, note that I refactored the guts of `Intersperse` into private functions and re-used them in `IntersperseWith`, so I also went light on duplicating all the tests.
If this is suitable to be merged, the tracking issue should be updated, since it only mentions `intersperse`.
Happy New Year!
r? ``@m-ou-se``
Add as_ref and as_mut methods for Bound
Add as_ref and as_mut method for std::ops::range::Bound, patterned off
of the methods of the same name on Option.
I'm not quite sure what the process is for introducing new feature gates (this is my first contribution) so I've left these ungated, but happy to do whatever is necessary to gate them.
These tests invoke the various op traits using all accepted types they
are implemented for as well as for references to those types.
This fixes#49660 and ensures the following implementations exist:
* `Add`, `Sub`, `Mul`, `Div`, `Rem`
* `T op T`, `T op &T`, `&T op T` and `&T op &T`
* for all integer and floating point types
* `AddAssign`, `SubAssign`, `MulAssign`, `DivAssign`, `RemAssign`
* `&mut T op T` and `&mut T op &T`
* for all integer and floating point types
* `Neg`
* `op T` and `op &T`
* for all signed integer and floating point types
* `Not`
* `op T` and `op &T`
* for `bool`
* `BitAnd`, `BitOr`, `BitXor`
* `T op T`, `T op &T`, `&T op T` and `&T op &T`
* for all integer types and bool
* `BitAndAssign`, `BitOrAssign`, `BitXorAssign`
* `&mut T op T` and `&mut T op &T`
* for all integer types and bool
* `Shl`, `Shr`
* `L op R`, `L op &R`, `&L op R` and `&L op &R`
* for all pairs of integer types
* `ShlAssign`, `ShrAssign`
* `&mut L op R`, `&mut L op &R`
* for all pairs of integer types
Rework diagnostics for wrong number of generic args (fixes#66228 and #71924)
This PR reworks the `wrong number of {} arguments` message, so that it provides more details and contextual hints.
Stabilize split_inclusive
### Contents of this MR
This stabilises:
* `slice::split_inclusive`
* `slice::split_inclusive_mut`
* `str::split_inclusive`
Closes#72360.
### A possible concern
The proliferation of `split_*` methods is not particularly pretty. The existence of `split_inclusive` seems to invite the addition of `rsplit_inclusive`, `splitn_inclusive`, etc. We could instead have a more general API, along these kinds of lines maybe:
```
pub fn split_generic('a,P,H>(&'a self, pat: P, how: H) -> ...
where P: Pattern
where H: SplitHow;
pub fn split_generic_mut('a,P,H>(&'a mut self, pat: P, how: H) -> ...
where P: Pattern
where H: SplitHow;
trait SplitHow {
fn reverse(&self) -> bool;
fn inclusive -> bool;
fn limit(&self) -> Option<usize>;
}
pub struct SplitFwd;
...
pub struct SplitRevInclN(pub usize);
```
But maybe that is worse.
### Let us defer that? ###
This seems like a can of worms. I think we can defer opening it now; if and when we have something more general, these two methods can become convenience aliases. But I thought I would mention it so the lang API team can consider it and have an opinion.
Add `MaybeUninit` method `array_assume_init`
When initialising an array element-by-element, the conversion to the initialised array is done through `mem::transmute`, which is both ugly and does not work with const generics (see #61956). This PR proposes the associated method `array_assume_init`, matching the style of `slice_assume_init_*`:
```rust
unsafe fn array_assume_init<T, const N: usize>(array: [MaybeUninit<T>; N]) -> [T; N];
```
Example:
```rust
let mut array: [MaybeUninit<i32>; 3] = MaybeUninit::uninit_array();
array[0].write(0);
array[1].write(1);
array[2].write(2);
// SAFETY: Now safe as we initialised all elements
let array: [i32; 3] = unsafe {
MaybeUninit::array_assume_init(array)
};
```
Things I'm unsure about:
* Should this be a method of array instead?
* Should the function be const?
std/core docs: fix wrong link in PartialEq
PartialEq doc was attempting to link to ``[`Eq`]`` but instead we got a link to `` `eq` ``. Disambiguate with `trait@Eq`.
You can see the bad link [here](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/cmp/trait.PartialEq.html) (Second sentence, "floating point types implement PartialEq but not Eq").
These methods work very similarly to `Option`'s methods `as_ref` and
`as_mut`. They are useful in several situation, particularly when
calling other array methods (like `map`) on the result. Unfortunately,
we can't easily call them `as_ref` and `as_mut` as that would shadow
those methods on slices, thus being a breaking change (that is likely
to affect a lot of code).
Implement From<char> for u64 and u128.
With this PR you can write
```
let u = u64::from('👤');
let u = u128::from('👤');
```
Previously, you could already write `as` conversions ([Playground link](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=cee18febe28e69024357d099f07ca081)):
```
// Lossless conversions
dbg!('👤' as u32); // Prints 128100
dbg!('👤' as u64); // Prints 128100
dbg!('👤' as u128); // Prints 128100
// truncates, thus no `From` impls.
dbg!('👤' as u8); // Prints 100
dbg!('👤' as u16); // Prints 62564
// These `From` impls already exist.
dbg!(u32::from('👤')); // Prints 128100
dbg!(u64::from(u32::from('👤'))); // Prints 128100
```
The idea is from ``@gendx`` who opened [this Internals thread](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/implement-from-char-for-u64/13454), and ``@withoutboats`` responded that someone should open a PR for it.
Some people mentioned `From<char>` impls for `f32` and `f64`, but that doesn't seem correct to me, so I didn't include them here.
I don't know what the feature should be named. Must it be registered somewhere, like unstable features?
r? ``@withoutboats``
Stabilize slice::strip_prefix and slice::strip_suffix
These two methods are useful. The corresponding methods on `str` are already stable.
I believe that stablising these now would not get in the way of, in the future, extending these to take a richer pattern API a la `str`'s patterns.
Tracking PR: #73413. I also have an outstanding PR to improve the docs for these two functions and the corresponding ones on `str`: #75078
I have tried to follow the [instructions in the dev guide](https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/stabilization_guide.html#stabilization-pr). The part to do with `compiler/rustc_feature` did not seem applicable. I assume that's because these are just library features, so there is no corresponding machinery in rustc.
Change:
```
`parse` can parse any type that...
```
to:
```
`parse` can parse into any type that...
```
Word `into` added to be more precise and in coherence with other parts of the doc.
Add more code spans to docs in intrinsics.rs
I have added some more code spans in core/src/intrinsics.rs, changing some `=` to `==`, etc. I also changed the wording in some sections.
