This commit stabilizes essentially all of the new `std::path` API. The
API itself is changed in a couple of ways (which brings it in closer
alignment with the RFC):
* `.` components are now normalized away, unless they appear at the
start of a path. This in turn effects the semantics of e.g. asking for
the file name of `foo/` or `foo/.`, both of which yield `Some("foo")`
now. This semantics is what the original RFC specified, and is also
desirable given early experience rolling out the new API.
* The `parent` function now succeeds if, and only if, the path has at
least one non-root/prefix component. This change affects `pop` as
well.
* The `Prefix` component now involves a separate `PrefixComponent`
struct, to better allow for keeping both parsed and unparsed prefix data.
In addition, the `old_path` module is now deprecated.
Closes#23264
[breaking-change]
This commit deprecates the majority of std::old_io::fs in favor of std::fs and
its new functionality. Some functions remain non-deprecated but are now behind a
feature gate called `old_fs`. These functions will be deprecated once
suitable replacements have been implemented.
The compiler has been migrated to new `std::fs` and `std::path` APIs where
appropriate as part of this change.
This allows to create proper debuginfo line information for items inlined from other crates (e.g. instantiations of generics).
Only the codemap's 'metadata' is stored in a crate's metadata. That is, just filename, line-beginnings, etc. but not the actual source code itself. We are thus missing the opportunity of making Rust the first "open-source-only" programming language out there. Pity.
Many of the modifications putting in `Box::new` calls also include a
pointer to Issue 22405, which tracks going back to `box <expr>` if
possible in the future.
(Still tried to use `Box<_>` where it sufficed; thus some tests still
have `box_syntax` enabled, as they use a mix of `box` and `Box::new`.)
Precursor for overloaded-`box` and placement-`in`; see Issue 22181.
This changes the type of some public constants/statics in libunicode.
Notably some `&'static &'static [(char, char)]` have changed
to `&'static [(char, char)]`. The regexp crate seems to be the
sole user of these, yet this is technically a [breaking-change]
Fixing #21475. Right now this code can not be parsed:
```rust
use m::{START, END};
fn main() {
match 42u32 {
m::START...m::END => {}, // error: expected one of `::`, `=>`, or `|`, found `...`
_ => {},
}
}
mod m {
pub const START: u32 = 4;
pub const END: u32 = 14;
}
```
I fixed the parser and added test for this case, but now there are still problems with mixing literals and paths in interval:
```rust
match 42u32 {
0u32...m::END => {}, // mismatched types in range [E0031]
m::START...59u32 => {}, // mismatched types in range [E0031]
_ => {},
}
}
```
I'll try fix this problem and need review.
This is one more step towards completing #13231
This series of commits add support for default trait implementations. The changes in this PR don't break existing code and they are expected to preserve the existing behavior in the compiler as far as built-in bounds checks go.
The PR adds negative implementations of `Send`/`Sync` for some types and it removes the special cases for `Send`/`Sync` during the trait obligations checks. That is, it now fully relies on the traits check rather than lang items.
Once this patch lands and a new snapshot is created, it'll be possible to add default impls for `Send` and `Sync` and remove entirely the use of `BuiltinBound::{BoundSend,BoundSync}` for positive implementations as well.
This PR also removes the restriction on negative implementations. That is, it is now possible to add negative implementations for traits other than `Send`/`Sync`
This is not a complete implementation of the RFC:
- only existing methods got updated, no new ones added
- doc comments are not extensive enough yet
- optimizations got lost and need to be reimplemented
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/528
Technically a
[breaking-change]
they are used without a feature-gate. This is both kinder to existing
code and should make it easier to land this PR, since we don't
have to catch EVERY SINGLE SUFFIX.
It's not clear what this means, because a macro in item position can expand to zero or more items. For now we disallow it, which is technically a
[breaking-change]
but is landing without an RFC. The `pub` keyword previously had no effect, which seems quite unintended.
Fixes#18317.
Fixes#14660.
Some function signatures have changed, so this is a [breaking-change].
In particular, radixes and numerical values of digits are represented by `u32` now.
Part of #22240
It is only allowed in paths now, where it will either work inside a `trait`
or `impl` item, or not resolve outside of it.
[breaking-change]
Closes#22137
It's not clear what this means, because a macro in item position can expand to
zero or more items. For now we disallow it, which is technically a
[breaking-change]
but is landing without an RFC. The `pub` keyword previously had no effect,
which seems quite unintended.
Fixes#18317.
Fixes#14660.
It is only allowed in paths now, where it will either work inside a `trait`
or `impl` item, or not resolve outside of it.
[breaking-change]
Closes#22137
The word is repeated twice in the message like:
error: obsolete syntax: `:`, `&mut:`, or `&:` syntax
This removes the word syntax that appears in messages after the second colon (:).
The word is repeated twice in the message like
error: obsolete syntax: `:`, `&mut:`, or `&:` syntax
This removes the word syntax that appears in messages after the second colon (:).
