Fix overflow checking in unsigned pow()
The pow() method for unsigned integers produced 0 instead of trapping overflow for certain inputs. Calls such as 2u32.pow(1024) produced 0 when they should trap an overflow. This also adds tests for the correctly handling overflow in unsigned pow().
This was previously fixed for signed integers in #28248, but it seems unsigned integers got missed that time.
For issue number #34913
[T]'s Index implementation is normally not used for indexing, instead
the compiler supplied indexing is used.
Use the compiler supplied version in Index/IndexMut.
This removes an inconsistency:
Compiler supplied bound check failures look like this:
thread 'main' panicked at 'index out of bounds: the len is 3 but the index is 4'
If you convince Rust to use the Index impl for slices, bounds check
failure looks like this instead:
thread 'main' panicked at 'assertion failed: index < self.len()'
The latter is used if you for example use Index generically::
use std::ops::Index;
fn foo<T: ?Sized>(x: &T) where T: Index<usize> { &x[4]; }
foo(&[1, 2, 3][..])
Remove the old AST-based backend from rustc_trans.
Starting with Rust 1.13, `--disable-orbit` , `-Z orbit=off` and `#[rustc_no_mir]` have been removed.
Only the new MIR backend is left in the compiler, and only early const_eval uses ASTs from other crates.
Filling drop (previously "zeroing drop"), `#[unsafe_no_drop_flag]` and associated unstable APIs are gone.
Implementing `Drop` doesn't add a flag anymore to the type, all of the dynamic drop is function local.
This is a [breaking-change], please use `Option::None` and/or `mem::forget` if you are unsure about your ability to prevent/control the drop of a value. In the future, `union` will be usable in some such cases.
**NOTE**: DO NOT MERGE before we get the new beta as the stage0, there's some cruft to remove.
All of this will massively simplify any efforts to implement (and as such it blocks) features such as `union`s, safe use of `#[packed]` or new type layout optimizations, not to mention many other experiments.
The pow() method for unsigned integers produced 0 instead of trapping
overflow for certain inputs. Calls such as 2u32.pow(1024) produced 0
when they should trap an overflow. This also adds tests for the
correctly handling overflow in unsigned pow().
For issue number #34913
MSVC requires unwinding code to be split to a tree of *funclets*, where each funclet
can only branch to itself or to to its parent.
Luckily, the code we generates matches this pattern. Recover that structure in
an analyze pass and translate according to that.
Rename main thread from "<main>" to "main".
Fix issue #33789
We may need to discuss whether this counts as a breaking change since code may check the main thread name against "\<main\>". Discussion is in #33789
This PR extends compiletest to support **test revisions** and with a preliminary **incremental testing harness**. run-pass, compile-fail, and run-fail tests may be tagged with
```
// revisions: a b c d
```
This will cause the test to be re-run four times with `--cfg {a,b,c,d}` in turn. This means you can write very closely related things using `cfg`. You can also configure the headers/expected-errors by writing `//[foo] header: value` or `//[foo]~ ERROR bar`, where `foo` is the name of your revision. See the changes to `coherence-cow.rs` as a proof of concept.
The main point of this work is to support the incremental testing harness. This PR contains an initial, unused version. The code that uses it will land later. The incremental testing harness compiles each revision in turn, and requires that the revisions have particular names (e.g., `rpass2`, `cfail3`), which tell it whether a particular revision is expected to compile or not.
Two questions:
- Is there compiletest documentation anywhere I can update?
- Should I hold off on landing the incremental testing harness until I have the code to exercise it? (That will come in a separate PR, still fixing a few details)
r? @alexcrichton
cc @rust-lang/compiler <-- new testing capabilities
This commit removes all unstable and deprecated functions in the standard
library. A release was recently cut (1.3) which makes this a good time for some
spring cleaning of the deprecated functions.
`assert_eq!` has better diagnostics than `assert!` and is more helpful when something actually breaks, but the diagnostics has it's price - `assert_eq!` generate some formatting code which is slower to compile and possibly run.
[My measurements](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/assert-a-b-or-assert-eq-a-b/1367/12?u=petrochenkov) show that presence of this formatting code doesn't affect compilation + execution time of the test suite significantly, so `assert_eq!` can be used instead of `assert!` consistently.
(Some tests doesn't reside in src/test, they are not affected by these changes, I'll probably open a separate PR for them later)
