Adds an `uninit` intrinsic.
It's just an empty function, so llvm optimizes it down to nothing.
I changed all of the `init` intrinsic usages to `uninit` where it seemed appropriate to.
I removed some of the copies, but most are just made explicit. The usage in `libcore` was already fixed, but the attribute was only set to warn (not removed).
Hi there,
Really enjoying Rust. Noticed a few typos so I searched around for a few more--here's some fixes.
Ran `make check` and got `summary of 24 test runs: 4868 passed; 0 failed; 330 ignored`.
Thanks!
Sean
At the moment this only includes type checking and there is no code generation support yet. I wanted to get the design reviewed first.
From discussion with @graydon at #5841, re-implemented as `#[simd]` attribute on structs.
Progressing towards #3499.
This is part of the redesign of the numeric traits tracked in issue #4819.
Renamed:
- `Exponential::expm1` -> `Float::exp_m1` - for consistency with underscore usage elsewhere
- `Exponential::log` -> `Exponential::ln` - a less ambiguous name for the natural logarithm
- `{float, f64, f32}::logarithm` -> `Exponential::log` - for arbitrary base logarithms
- `Real::log_2` -> `Real::ln_2` - for consistency with `ln`
- `Real::log_10` -> `Real::ln_10` - for consistency with `ln`
Added:
- `Signed::abs_sub` - wraps libm's `fdim` function
- `Float::is_normal` - returns `true` if the number is neither zero, infinite, subnormal or NaN
- `Float::classify` - returns the floating point category of the number
- `Float::ln_1p` - returns the natural logarithm of the number plus one
@brson: r? [please ignore the other one that was accidentally based off master due to back-button-bugs in github.com]
My goal is to resolve the question of whether we want to encourage (by example) consistent use of pub to make identifiers publicly-accessible, even in syntax extensions. (If people don't want that, then we can just let this pull request die.)
This is part one of two. Part two, whose contents should be clear from the FIXME's in this commit, would land after this gets incorporated into a snapshot.
(The eventual goal is to address issue #6009 , which was implied by my choice of branch name, but not mentioned in the pull request, so github did not notice it.)
