docs: Iterator adapters have unspecified results after a panic
Fixes#58170.
That issue also has rough consensus from 3 members of the library team for this being the behavior we would like to specify.
This commit applies rustfmt with default settings to files in
src/libcore *that are not involved in any currently open PR* to minimize
merge conflicts. The list of files involved in open PRs was determined
by querying GitHub's GraphQL API with this script:
https://gist.github.com/dtolnay/aa9c34993dc051a4f344d1b10e4487e8
With the list of files from the script in `outstanding_files`, the
relevant commands were:
$ find src/libcore -name '*.rs' | xargs rustfmt --edition=2018
$ rg libcore outstanding_files | xargs git checkout --
Repeating this process several months apart should get us coverage of
most of the rest of libcore.
Clarify Step Documentation
While the redesign is in progress (#62886), clarify the purpose of replace_zero and replace_one.
First, "returning itself" is technically impossible due to the function signature of &mut self -> Self. A clone or copy operation must be used. So this is now explicitly stated in the documentation.
Second, the added docs give some guidance about the actual contract around implementation of replace_zero and replace one. Specifically, the only usage is to create a range with no more steps, by setting start to replace_one and end to replace_zero. So the only property that is actually used is `replace_one > replace_zero`. See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/42168#issuecomment-489554232
The new documentation does not say that is the *only* contract, and so it should not be considered an api change. It just highlights the most important detail for implementors.
The redesign doesn't seem to be landing any time soon, so this is a stopgap measure to reduce confusion in the meantime.
Fix documentation for `Iterator::count()`.
The documentation of std::core::Iterator::count() stated that the number returned is the number of times `next` is called on the iterator. However this is not true as the number of times `next` is called is exactly one plus the number returned by `count()`.
Have tidy ensure that we document all `unsafe` blocks in libcore
cc @rust-lang/libs
I documented a few and added ignore flags on the other files. We can incrementally document the files, but won't regress any files this way.
Add future incompatibility lint for `array.into_iter()`
This is for #65819. This lint warns when calling `into_iter` on an array directly. That's because today the method call resolves to `<&[T] as IntoIterator>::into_iter` but that would change when adding `IntoIterator` impls for arrays. This problem is discussed in detail in #65819.
We still haven't decided how to proceed exactly, but it seems like adding a lint is a good idea regardless?
Also: this is the first time I implement a lint, so there are probably a lot of things I can improve. I used a different strategy than @scottmcm describes [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/65819#issuecomment-548667847) since I already started implementing this before they commented.
### TODO
- [x] Decide if we want this lint -> apparently [we want](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/65819#issuecomment-548964818)
- [x] Open a lint-tracking-issue and add the correct issue number in the code -> https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/66145
As we might want to add `IntoIterator` impls for arrays in the future,
and since that introduces a breaking change, this lint warns and
suggests using `iter()` instead (which is shorter and more explicit).
Improved std::iter::Chain documentation
Replaces `strings two iterators` by `links two iterators` in `std::iter::Chain` documentation.
I didn't find any meaning of `strings` which can be evaluated as `links` or `joins`.
I don't think that `std::iter:Chain` works as a stringer or plays billiards. (https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/string).
Document the unstable iter_order_by library feature
Tracking issue: #64295
Follow-up for: #62205
References the tracking issue and adds a page to the unstable book for the new unstable `iter_order_by` feature.
Add `cmp::{min_by, min_by_key, max_by, max_by_key}`
This adds the following functions to `core::cmp`:
- `min_by`
- `min_by_key`
- `max_by`
- `max_by_key`
`min_by` and `max_by` are somewhat trivial to implement, but not entirely because `min_by` returns the first value in case the two are equal (and `max_by` the second). `min` and `max` can be implemented in terms of `min_by` and `max_by`, but not as easily the other way around.
To give an example of why I think these functions could be useful: the `Iterator::{min_by, min_by_key, max_by, max_by_key}` methods all currently hard-code the behavior mentioned above which is an ever so small duplication of logic. If we delegate them to `cmp::{min_by, max_by}` methods instead, we get the correct behavior for free. (edit: this is now included in the PR)
I added `min_by_key` / `max_by_key` for consistency's sake but I wouldn't mind removing them. I don't have a particular use case in mind for them, and `min_by` / `max_by` seem to be more useful.
Tracking issue: #64460
Override `StepBy::{try_fold, try_rfold}`
Previous PR: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/51435
The previous PR was closed in favor of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/51601, which was later reverted. I don't think these implementations will make it harder to specialize `StepBy<Range<_>>` later, so we should be able to land this without any consequences.
This should fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/57517 – in my benchmarks `iter` and `iter.step_by(1)` now perform equally well, provided internal iteration is used.
Because of a compiler bug that adding `Self: ExactSizeIterator` makes
the compiler forget `Self::Item` is `<I as Iterator>::Item`, we remove
this specialization for now.
Override Cycle::try_fold
It's not very pretty, but I believe this is the simplest way to correctly implement `Cycle::try_fold`. The following may seem correct:
```rust
loop {
acc = self.iter.try_fold(acc, &mut f)?;
self.iter = self.orig.clone();
}
```
...but this loops infinitely in case `self.orig` is empty, as opposed to returning `acc`. So we first have to fully iterate `self.orig` to check whether it is empty or not, and before _that_, we have to iterate the remaining elements of `self.iter`.
This should always call `self.orig.clone()` the same amount of times as repeated `next()` calls would.
r? @scottmcm
