Rollup of 11 pull requests #75688
Closed
Rollup of 11 pull requests #75688
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
In the current documentation about the `Copy` marker trait, there is a section about "additional implementors", which list additional implementors of the `Copy` trait. The fact that shared references are also `Copy` is mixed with another point, which makes it hard to recognize and make it seem not as important. This clarifies the fact that shared references are also `Copy`, by mentioning it as a separate item in the list of "additional implementors".
In the current documentation about the `Copy` marker trait, there is a section with examples of structs that can implement `Copy`. Currently there is no example for showing that shared references (`&T`) are also `Copy`. It is worth to have a dedicated example for `&T` being `Copy`, because shared references are an integral part of the language and it being `Copy` is not as intuitive as other types that share this behaviour like `i32` or `bool`. The example picks up on the previous non-`Copy` struct and shows that structs can be `Copy`, even when they hold a shared reference to a non-`Copy` type.
Co-authored-by: Joshua Nelson <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Joshua Nelson <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Poliorcetics <[email protected]>
Code blocks in doc comments are compiled and run, so we show `Copy` works in this example. Co-authored-by: Poliorcetics <[email protected]>
Adds a seen set to structurally_same_type to avoid recursing indefinitely when a reference or pointer member introduces a cycle in the visited types.
That cache is unlikely to be particularly useful within a single invocation of structurally_same_type, especially compared to memoizing results across _all_ invocations of that function.
Co-authored-by: Bastian Kauschke <[email protected]>
…ant in the language. (Note that the fact this test existed is a slight sign that we may need a crater run on this bugfix...)
…nt on each insert. Drive-by changes: 1. make `LintLevelsBuilder::push` private to the crate. 2. Add methods to `LintSource` for extracting its name symbol or its span.
This adds another `derive` for a `Copy`able struct, so that we are consistent with `derive` annotations.
…xpressions Avoid showing this error where it doesn't make sense by not assuming "and" and "or" were intended to mean "&&" and "||" until after we decide to continue parsing input as an associative expression. Note that the decision of whether or not to continue parsing input as an associative expression doesn't actually depend on this assumption. Fixes rust-lang#75599
…ide-forbid-in-same-scope, r=petrochenkov Disallow later override of forbid lint in same scope Fix rust-lang#70819 When building lint specs map for a given scope, check if forbid present on each insert. Drive-by changes: 1. make `LintLevelsBuilder::push` private to the crate. 2. Add methods to `LintSource` for extracting its name symbol or its span. 3. Rewrote old test so that its use of lint attributes are consistent with what we want in the language. (Note that the fact this test existed is a slight sign that we may need a crater run on this bugfix...)
…bnik
See also X-Link mem::{swap, take, replace}
Since it's easy to end up at one of these functions when you really wanted the other one, cross link them with descriptions of why you'd want to use them.
docs(marker/copy): provide example for `&T` being `Copy` ### Edited 2020-08-16 (most recent) In the current documentation about the `Copy` marker trait, there is a section with examples of structs that can implement `Copy`. Currently there is no example for showing that shared references (`&T`) are also `Copy`. It is worth to have a dedicated example for `&T` being `Copy`, because shared references are an integral part of the language and it being `Copy` is not as intuitive as other types that share this behaviour like `i32` or `bool`. The example picks up on the previous non-`Copy` struct and shows that structs can be `Copy`, even when they hold a shared reference to a non-`Copy` type. ----------------------------------------- ### Edited 2020-08-02, 3:28 p.m. I've just realized that it says "in addition to the **implementors listed below**", which makes this PR kind of "wrong", because `&T` is indeed in the "implementors listed below". Maybe we can instead show an example with `&T` in the [When can my type be Copy](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/marker/trait.Copy.html#when-can-my-type-be-copy) section. What I really want to achieve is that it becomes more obvious that `&T` is also `Copy`, because, I think, it is very valuable to know and it wasn't obvious for me, until I read something about it in a forum post. What do you think? I would create another PR for that. **Please feel free to close this PR.** ----------------------------------- ### Original post In the current documentation about the `Copy` marker trait, there is a section about "additional implementors", which list additional implementors of the `Copy` trait. The fact that shared references are also `Copy` is mixed with another point, which makes it hard to recognize and make it seem not as important. This clarifies the fact that shared references are also `Copy`, by mentioning it as a separate item in the list of "additional implementors".
…rk-Simulacrum BTreeMap: check some invariants in unit tests
…-75412, r=Dylan-DPC Fix documentation error This should fix rust-lang#75412. Just a quick >= to > sign replacement.
…erflow, r=lcnr Fix clashing_extern_declarations stack overflow for recursive types. Fixes rust-lang#75512. Adds a seen set to `structurally_same_type` to avoid recursing indefinitely for types which contain values of the same type through a pointer or reference.
…r=jyn514 Move to intra doc links for keyword documentation Helps with rust-lang#75080. @rustbot modify labels: T-doc, A-intra-doc-links, T-rustdoc
…aumeGomez Fix intra-doc links for inherent impls that are both lang items and not the default impl I found in rust-lang#75464 (comment) that `str::to_uppercase()` doesn't resolve while `str::trim()` does. The only real difference is that `to_uppercase` is defined in `alloc`, while trim is defined in `core`. It turns out that rustdoc was ignoring `lang_items.str_alloc_impl()` - it saw them in `collect_trait_impls`, but not for intra-doc links. This uses the same `impls` for all parts of rustdoc, so that there can be no more inconsistency. It does have the slight downside that the matches are no longer exhaustive but it will be very clear if a new lang item is missed because it will panic when you try to document it (and if you don't document it, does rustdoc really need to know about it?). ~~This needs a test case (probably just `str::to_uppercase`).~~ Added. This is best reviewed commit-by-commit. r? @GuillaumeGomez
Don't emit "is not a logical operator" error outside of associative expressions Avoid showing this error where it doesn't make sense by not assuming "and" and "or" were intended to mean "&&" and "||" until after we decide to continue parsing input as an associative expression. Note that the decision of whether or not to continue parsing input as an associative expression doesn't actually depend on this assumption. Fixes rust-lang#75599 --- First time contributor! Let me know if there are any conventions or policies I should be following that I missed here. Thanks :)
…e, r=jyn514 Add doc examples coverage r? @jyn514
Switch to intra-doc links in /src/sys/unix/ext/*.rs Partial fix for rust-lang#75080 @rustbot modify labels: T-doc, A-intra-doc-links, T-rustdoc r? @jyn514 These two links are not resolving to either `crate::fs::File...` or `fs::File...` ``` # unix/ext/fs.rs 27: /// [`File::read`]: ../../../../std/fs/struct.File.html#method.read 130: /// [`File::write`]: ../../../../std/fs/struct.File.html#method.write ```
|
📌 Commit 5013e01 has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
⌛ Testing commit 5013e01 with merge 260cb74392901456ddf8fad975c1ebc13819ccb2... |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-azure |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #75692) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Successful merges:
&TbeingCopy#75049 (docs(marker/copy): provide example for&TbeingCopy)Failed merges:
r? @ghost