Tracking the old name of renamed unstable library features
This PR resolves the first problem of rust-lang/rust#141617 : tracking renamed unstable features. The first commit is to add a ui test, and the second one tracks the changes. I will comment on the code for clarification.
r? `@jdonszelmann`
There have been a lot of PR's reviewed by you lately, thanks for your time!
cc `@jyn514`
These gates are unnecessary now that unit tests for `core` are in a
separate package, `coretests`, instead of in the same files as the
source code. They previously prevented the two `core` versions from
conflicting with each other.
Field init shorthand allows writing initializers like `tcx: tcx` as
`tcx`. The compiler already uses it extensively. Fix the last few places
where it isn't yet used.
Fundamentally, we have *three* disjoint categories of functions:
1. const-stable functions
2. private/unstable functions that are meant to be callable from const-stable functions
3. functions that can make use of unstable const features
This PR implements the following system:
- `#[rustc_const_stable]` puts functions in the first category. It may only be applied to `#[stable]` functions.
- `#[rustc_const_unstable]` by default puts functions in the third category. The new attribute `#[rustc_const_stable_indirect]` can be added to such a function to move it into the second category.
- `const fn` without a const stability marker are in the second category if they are still unstable. They automatically inherit the feature gate for regular calls, it can now also be used for const-calls.
Also, several holes in recursive const stability checking are being closed.
There's still one potential hole that is hard to avoid, which is when MIR
building automatically inserts calls to a particular function in stable
functions -- which happens in the panic machinery. Those need to *not* be
`rustc_const_unstable` (or manually get a `rustc_const_stable_indirect`) to be
sure they follow recursive const stability. But that's a fairly rare and special
case so IMO it's fine.
The net effect of this is that a `#[unstable]` or unmarked function can be
constified simply by marking it as `const fn`, and it will then be
const-callable from stable `const fn` and subject to recursive const stability
requirements. If it is publicly reachable (which implies it cannot be unmarked),
it will be const-unstable under the same feature gate. Only if the function ever
becomes `#[stable]` does it need a `#[rustc_const_unstable]` or
`#[rustc_const_stable]` marker to decide if this should also imply
const-stability.
Adding `#[rustc_const_unstable]` is only needed for (a) functions that need to
use unstable const lang features (including intrinsics), or (b) `#[stable]`
functions that are not yet intended to be const-stable. Adding
`#[rustc_const_stable]` is only needed for functions that are actually meant to
be directly callable from stable const code. `#[rustc_const_stable_indirect]` is
used to mark intrinsics as const-callable and for `#[rustc_const_unstable]`
functions that are actually called from other, exposed-on-stable `const fn`. No
other attributes are required.
Improve docs for Waker::noop and LocalWaker::noop
* Add a warning about a likely misuse. (See my commit message for longer rationale.)
* Apply some probably-accidentally-omitted changes to `LocalWaker`'s docs
* Add a comment about the clone-and-hack of the docs
I have used [semantic linefeeds](https://rhodesmill.org/brandon/2012/one-sentence-per-line/) for the docs formatting.
Stabilize `const_waker`
Closes: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/102012.
For `local_waker` and `context_ext` related things, I just ~~moved them to dedicated feature gates and reused their own tracking issue (maybe it's better to open a new one later, but at least they should not be tracked under https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/102012 from the beginning IMO.)~~ reused their own feature gates as suggested by ``@tgross35.``
``@rustbot`` label: +T-libs-api
r? libs-api
In 6f8a944ba4, titled
Change return type of unstable `Waker::noop()` from `Waker` to `&Waker`.
the summary line for Waker was changed:
- /// Creates a new `Waker` that does nothing when `wake` is called.
+ /// Returns a reference to a `Waker` that does nothing when used.
and the sentence about clone was added.
LocalWaker's docs were not changed, even though the types were, but
there is no explanation for why not. It seems like it was simply a
slip induced by the clone-and-hack.
Document overrides of `clone_from()` in core/std
As mentioned in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/96979#discussion_r1379502413
Specifically, when an override doesn't just forward to an inner type, document the behavior and that it's preferred over simply assigning a clone of source. Also, change instances where the second parameter is "other" to "source".
I reused some of the wording over and over for similar impls, but I'm not sure that the wording is actually *good*. Would appreciate feedback about that.
Also, now some of these seem to provide pretty specific guarantees about behavior (e.g. will reuse the exact same allocation iff the len is the same), but I was basing it off of the docs for [`Box::clone_from`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.75.0/std/boxed/struct.Box.html#method.clone_from-1) - I'm not sure if providing those strong guarantees is actually good or not.
Specifically, when an override doesn't just forward to an inner type,
document the behavior and that it's preferred over simply assigning
a clone of source. Also, change instances where the second parameter is
"other" to "source".
Waker::will_wake: Compare vtable address instead of its content
Optimize will_wake implementation by comparing vtable address instead of its content.
The existing best practice to avoid false negatives from will_wake is to define a waker vtable as a static item. That approach continues to works with the new implementation.
While this potentially changes the observable behaviour, the function is documented to work on a best-effort basis. The PartialEq impl for RawWaker remains as it was.
Additional doc links and explanation of `Wake`.
This is intended to clarify:
* That `Wake` exists and can be used instead of `RawWaker`.
* How to construct a `Waker` when you are looking at `Wake` (which was previously only documented in the example).
This is intended to clarify:
* That `Wake` exists and can be used instead of `RawWaker`.
* How to construct a `Waker` when you are looking at `Wake`
(which was previously only documented in the example).
This also removes
* impl From<&Context> for ContextBuilder
* Context::try_waker()
The from implementation is removed because now that
wakers are always supported, there are less incentives
to override the current context. Before, the incentive
was to add Waker support to a reactor that didn't have
any.
