Improve slice.binary_search_by()'s best-case performance to O(1)
This PR aimed to improve the [slice.binary_search_by()](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.slice.html#method.binary_search_by)'s best-case performance to O(1).
# Noticed
I don't know why the docs of `binary_search_by` said `"If there are multiple matches, then any one of the matches could be returned."`, but the implementation isn't the same thing. Actually, it returns the **last one** if multiple matches found.
Then we got two options:
## If returns the last one is the correct or desired result
Then I can rectify the docs and revert my changes.
## If the docs are correct or desired result
Then my changes can be merged after fully reviewed.
However, if my PR gets merged, another issue raised: this could be a **breaking change** since if multiple matches found, the returning order no longer the last one instead of it could be any one.
For example:
```rust
let mut s = vec![0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55];
let num = 1;
let idx = s.binary_search(&num);
s.insert(idx, 2);
// Old implementations
assert_eq!(s, [0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 42, 55]);
// New implementations
assert_eq!(s, [0, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 42, 55]);
```
# Benchmarking
**Old implementations**
```sh
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 76 ns/iter (+/- 5)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 77 ns/iter (+/- 17)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 183 ns/iter (+/- 23)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 185 ns/iter (+/- 19)
```
**New implementations (1)**
Implemented by this PR.
```rust
if cmp == Equal {
return Ok(mid);
} else if cmp == Less {
base = mid
}
```
```sh
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 58 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 37 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 76 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 6)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 200 ns/iter (+/- 30)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 157 ns/iter (+/- 6)
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 8)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 37 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 77 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 198 ns/iter (+/- 21)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 158 ns/iter (+/- 11)
```
**New implementations (2)**
Suggested by `@nbdd0121` in [comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74024#issuecomment-665430239).
```rust
base = if cmp == Greater { base } else { mid };
if cmp == Equal { break }
```
```sh
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 59 ns/iter (+/- 7)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 37 ns/iter (+/- 5)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 75 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 56 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 195 ns/iter (+/- 15)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 151 ns/iter (+/- 7)
$ ./x.py bench --stage 1 library/libcore
test slice::binary_search_l1 ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l1_with_dups ... bench: 38 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test slice::binary_search_l2 ... bench: 77 ns/iter (+/- 11)
test slice::binary_search_l2_with_dups ... bench: 57 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test slice::binary_search_l3 ... bench: 194 ns/iter (+/- 15)
test slice::binary_search_l3_with_dups ... bench: 151 ns/iter (+/- 18)
```
I run some benchmarking testings against on two implementations. The new implementation has a lot of improvement in duplicates cases, while in `binary_search_l3` case, it's a little bit slower than the old one.
Add diagnostic item to `Default` trait
This PR adds diagnostic item to `Default` trait to be used by rust-lang/rust-clippy#6562 issue.
Also fixes the obsolete path to the `symbols.rs` file in the comment.
Add assert_matches macro.
This adds `assert_matches!(expression, pattern)`.
Unlike the other asserts, this one ~~consumes the expression~~ may consume the expression, to be able to match the pattern. (It could add a `&` implicitly, but that's noticable in the pattern, and will make a consuming guard impossible.)
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/62633#issuecomment-790737853
This re-uses the same `left: .. right: ..` output as the `assert_eq` and `assert_ne` macros, but with the pattern as the right part:
assert_eq:
```
assertion failed: `(left == right)`
left: `Some("asdf")`,
right: `None`
```
assert_matches:
```
assertion failed: `(left matches right)`
left: `Ok("asdf")`,
right: `Err(_)`
```
cc ```@cuviper```
Add {BTreeMap,HashMap}::try_insert
`{BTreeMap,HashMap}::insert(key, new_val)` returns `Some(old_val)` if the key was already in the map. It's often useful to assert no duplicate values are inserted.
We experimented with `map.insert(key, val).unwrap_none()` (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/62633), but decided that that's not the kind of method we'd like to have on `Option`s.
`insert` always succeeds because it replaces the old value if it exists. One could argue that `insert()` is never the right method for panicking on duplicates, since already handles that case by replacing the value, only allowing you to panic after that already happened.
This PR adds a `try_insert` method that instead returns a `Result::Err` when the key already exists. This error contains both the `OccupiedEntry` and the value that was supposed to be inserted. This means that unwrapping that result gives more context:
```rust
map.insert(10, "world").unwrap_none();
// thread 'main' panicked at 'called `Option::unwrap_none()` on a `Some` value: "hello"', src/main.rs:8:29
```
```rust
map.try_insert(10, "world").unwrap();
// thread 'main' panicked at 'called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value:
// OccupiedError { key: 10, old_value: "hello", new_value: "world" }', src/main.rs:6:33
```
It also allows handling the failure in any other way, as you have full access to the `OccupiedEntry` and the value.
`try_insert` returns a reference to the value in case of success, making it an alternative to `.entry(key).or_insert(value)`.
r? ```@Amanieu```
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/3092
Avoid unnecessary Vec construction in BufReader
As mentioned in #80460, creating a `Vec` and calling `Vec::into_boxed_slice()` emits unnecessary calls to `realloc()` and `free()`. Updated the code to use `Box::new_uninit_slice()` to create a boxed slice directly. I think this also makes it more explicit that the initial contents of the buffer are uninitialized.
r? ``@m-ou-se``
Add suggestion `.collect()` for iterators in iterators
Closes#81584
```
error[E0515]: cannot return value referencing function parameter `y`
--> main3.rs:4:38
|
4 | ... .map(|y| y.iter().map(|x| x + 1))
| -^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| |
| returns a value referencing data owned by the current function
| `y` is borrowed here
| help: Maybe use `.collect()` to allocate the iterator
```
Added the suggestion: `help: Maybe use `.collect()` to allocate the iterator`
Improved IO Bytes Size Hint
After trying to implement better `size_hint()` return values for `File` in [this PR](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/81044) and changing to implementing it for `BufReader` in [this PR](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/81052), I have arrived at this implementation that provides tighter bounds for the `Bytes` iterator of various readers including `BufReader`, `Empty`, and `Chain`.
Unfortunately, for `BufReader`, the size_hint only improves after calling `fill_buffer` due to it using the contents of the buffer for the hint. Nevertheless, the the tighter bounds should result in better pre-allocation of space to handle the contents of the `Bytes` iterator.
Closes#81052
Implement NOOP_METHOD_CALL lint
Implements the beginnings of https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/issues/67 - a lint for detecting noop method calls (e.g, calling `<&T as Clone>::clone()` when `T: !Clone`).
This PR does not fully realize the vision and has a few limitations that need to be addressed either before merging or in subsequent PRs:
* [ ] No UFCS support
* [ ] The warning message is pretty plain
* [ ] Doesn't work for `ToOwned`
The implementation uses [`Instance::resolve`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/instance/struct.Instance.html#method.resolve) which is normally later in the compiler. It seems that there are some invariants that this function relies on that we try our best to respect. For instance, it expects substitutions to have happened, which haven't yet performed, but we check first for `needs_subst` to ensure we're dealing with a monomorphic type.
Thank you to ```@davidtwco,``` ```@Aaron1011,``` and ```@wesleywiser``` for helping me at various points through out this PR ❤️.
Upgrade to LLVM 12
This implements the necessary adjustments to make rustc work with LLVM 12. I didn't encounter any major issues so far.
r? `@cuviper`
Revert `Vec::spare_capacity_mut` impl to prevent pointers invalidation
The implementation was changed in #79015.
Later it was [pointed out](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81944#issuecomment-782849785) that the implementation invalidates pointers to the buffer (initialized elements) by creating a unique reference to the buffer. This PR reverts the implementation.
r? ```@RalfJung```
enable atomic_min/max tests in Miri
Thanks to `@henryboisdequin` and `@GregBowyer,` Miri now supports these intrinsics. :)
Also includes the necessary Miri update.
unix: Non-mutable bufs in send_vectored_with_ancillary_to
This is the same PR as [#79753](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79753). It was closed because of inactivity. Therefore, I create a new one. ````@lukaslihotzki````
Add is_enclave_range/is_user_range overflow checks
Fixes#76343.
This adds overflow checking to `is_enclave_range` and `is_user_range` in `sgx::os::fortanix_sgx::mem` in order to mitigate possible security issues with enclave code. It also accounts for an edge case where the memory range provided ends exactly at the end of the address space, where calculating `p + len` would overflow back to zero despite the range potentially being valid.