Commit graph

248 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Trevor Spiteri
b0f98c60a6 test integer log10 values close to all powers of 10 2021-07-07 14:07:32 +02:00
Yuki Okushi
c630b6b0fc
Rollup merge of #86880 - m-ou-se:test-manuallydrop-clone-from, r=Mark-Simulacrum
Test ManuallyDrop::clone_from.

See #86288
2021-07-07 12:17:41 +09:00
Yuki Okushi
9bbc470e97
Rollup merge of #80918 - yoshuawuyts:int-log2, r=m-ou-se
Add Integer::log variants

_This is another attempt at landing https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/70835, which was approved by the libs team but failed on Android tests through Bors. The text copied here is from the original issue. The only change made so far is the addition of non-`checked_` variants of the log methods._

_Tracking issue: #70887_

---

This implements `{log,log2,log10}` methods for all integer types. The implementation was provided by `@substack` for use in the stdlib.

_Note: I'm not big on math, so this PR is a best effort written with limited knowledge. It's likely I'll be getting things wrong, but happy to learn and correct. Please bare with me._

## Motivation
Calculating the logarithm of a number is a generally useful operation. Currently the stdlib only provides implementations for floats, which means that if we want to calculate the logarithm for an integer we have to cast it to a float and then back to an int.

> would be nice if there was an integer log2 instead of having to either use the f32 version or leading_zeros() which i have to verify the results of every time to be sure

_— [`@substack,` 2020-03-08](https://twitter.com/substack/status/1236445105197727744)_

At higher numbers converting from an integer to a float we also risk overflows. This means that Rust currently only provides log operations for a limited set of integers.

The process of doing log operations by converting between floats and integers is also prone to rounding errors. In the following example we're trying to calculate `base10` for an integer. We might try and calculate the `base2` for the values, and attempt [a base swap](https://www.rapidtables.com/math/algebra/Logarithm.html#log-rules) to arrive at `base10`. However because we're performing intermediate rounding we arrive at the wrong result:

```rust
// log10(900) = ~2.95 = 2
dbg!(900f32.log10() as u64);

// log base change rule: logb(x) = logc(x) / logc(b)
// log2(900) / log2(10) = 9/3 = 3
dbg!((900f32.log2() as u64) / (10f32.log2() as u64));
```
_[playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=6bd6c68b3539e400f9ca4fdc6fc2eed0)_

This is somewhat nuanced as a lot of the time it'll work well, but in real world code this could lead to some hard to track bugs. By providing correct log implementations directly on integers we can help prevent errors around this.

## Implementation notes

I checked whether LLVM intrinsics existed before implementing this, and none exist yet. ~~Also I couldn't really find a better way to write the `ilog` function. One option would be to make it a private method on the number, but I didn't see any precedent for that. I also didn't know where to best place the tests, so I added them to the bottom of the file. Even though they might seem like quite a lot they take no time to execute.~~

## References

- [Log rules](https://www.rapidtables.com/math/algebra/Logarithm.html#log-rules)
- [Rounding error playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=6bd6c68b3539e400f9ca4fdc6fc2eed0)
- [substack's tweet asking about integer log2 in the stdlib](https://twitter.com/substack/status/1236445105197727744)
- [Integer Logarithm, A. Jaffer 2008](https://people.csail.mit.edu/jaffer/III/ilog.pdf)
2021-07-07 12:17:32 +09:00
Mara Bos
3d20b2a14f Test ManuallyDrop::clone_from. 2021-07-05 11:55:45 +00:00
bors
90442458ac Auto merge of #86048 - nbdd0121:no_floating_point, r=Amanieu
core: add unstable no_fp_fmt_parse to disable float formatting code

In some projects (e.g. kernel), floating point is forbidden. They can disable
hardware floating point support and use `+soft-float` to avoid fp instructions
from being generated, but as libcore contains the formatting code for `f32`
and `f64`, some fp intrinsics are depended. One could define stubs for these
intrinsics that just panic [1], but it means that if any formatting functions
are accidentally used, mistake can only be caught during the runtime rather
than during compile-time or link-time, and they consume a lot of space without
LTO.

This patch provides an unstable cfg `no_fp_fmt_parse` to disable these.
A panicking stub is still provided for the `Debug` implementation (unfortunately)
because there are some SIMD types that use `#[derive(Debug)]`.

[1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/4/14/1028
2021-07-04 14:18:57 +00:00
Charles Lew
0d1919c7ab Remove the deprecated core::raw and std::raw module. 2021-07-03 14:03:27 +08:00
Guillaume Gomez
cd3a48fdb6
Rollup merge of #86797 - inquisitivecrystal:bound-cloned, r=jyn514
Stabilize `Bound::cloned()`

This PR stabilizes the function `Bound::cloned()`.

Closes #61356.
2021-07-02 11:35:31 +02:00
Aris Merchant
f2b21e2d0b Stabilize Bound::cloned() 2021-07-01 17:09:57 -07:00
Mark Rousskov
06661ba759 Update to new bootstrap compiler 2021-06-28 11:30:49 -04:00
Albin Hedman
6c890bb969
Revert "Revert tests added by PR 81167."
This reverts commit cebfcd3256.
2021-06-27 12:05:17 +02:00
Yoshua Wuyts
9f579968cd Add Integer::{log,log2,log10} variants 2021-06-25 18:52:46 +02:00
bors
75ed34223a Auto merge of #84910 - eopb:stabilize_int_error_matching, r=yaahc
stabilize `int_error_matching`

closes #22639

> It has been over half a year since https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/77640#pullrequestreview-511263516, and the indexing question is rejected in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79728#pullrequestreview-633030341, so I guess we can submit another stabilization attempt? 😉

_Originally posted by `@kennytm` in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/22639#issuecomment-831738266_
2021-06-22 09:30:15 +00:00
The8472
b4734b7c38 disable test on platforms that don't support unwinding 2021-06-20 12:20:05 +02:00
The8472
8b518542d0 fix panic-safety in specialized Zip::next_back
This was unsound since a panic in a.next_back() would result in the
length not being updated which would then lead to the same element
being revisited in the side-effect preserving code.
2021-06-19 02:20:51 +02:00
Yuki Okushi
5936ecc24f
Rollup merge of #85608 - scottmcm:stabilize-control-flow-enum-basics, r=m-ou-se
Stabilize `ops::ControlFlow` (just the type)

Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/75744 (which also tracks items *not* closed by this PR).

With the new `?` desugar implemented, [it's no longer possible to mix `Result` and `ControlFlow`](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=13feec97f5c96a9d791d97f7de2d49a6).  (At the time of making this PR, godbolt was still on the 2021-05-01 nightly, where you can see that [the mixing example compiled](https://rust.godbolt.org/z/13Ke54j16).)  That resolves the only blocker I know of, so I'd like to propose that `ControlFlow` be considered for stabilization.

Its basic existence was part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3058, where it got a bunch of positive comments (examples [1](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3058#issuecomment-758277325) [2](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3058#pullrequestreview-592106494) [3](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3058#issuecomment-784444155) [4](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3058#issuecomment-797031584)).  Its use in the compiler has been well received (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/78182#issuecomment-713695594), and there are ecosystem updates interested in using it (https://github.com/rust-itertools/itertools/issues/469#issuecomment-677729589, https://github.com/jonhoo/rust-imap/issues/194).

As this will need an FCP, picking a libs member manually:
r? `@m-ou-se`

## Stabilized APIs

```rust
#[derive(Debug, Clone, Copy, PartialEq)]
pub enum ControlFlow<B, C = ()> {
    /// Exit the operation without running subsequent phases.
    Break(B),
    /// Move on to the next phase of the operation as normal.
    Continue(C),
}
```

As well as using `?` on a `ControlFlow<B, _>` in a function returning `ControlFlow<B, _>`.  (Note, in particular, that there's no `From::from`-conversion on the `Break` value, the way there is for `Err`s.)

## Existing APIs *not* stabilized here

All the associated methods and constants: `break_value`, `is_continue`, `map_break`, [`CONTINUE`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/ops/enum.ControlFlow.html#associatedconstant.CONTINUE), etc.

Some of the existing methods in nightly seem reasonable, some seem like they should be removed, and some need more discussion to decide.  But none of them are *essential*, so [as in the RFC](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3058-try-trait-v2.html#methods-on-controlflow), they're all omitted from this PR.

They can be considered separately later, as further usage demonstrates which are important.
2021-06-15 17:40:08 +09:00
Ethan Brierley
b59f7d9662 stabilize int_error_matching 2021-06-14 09:58:32 +01:00
bors
46ad16b70f Auto merge of #85630 - gilescope:to_digit_speedup3, r=nagisa
to_digit simplification (less jumps)

I just realised we might be able to make use of the fact that changing case in ascii is easy to help simplify to_digit some more.

It looks a bit cleaner and it looks like it's less jumps and there's less instructions in the generated assembly:

https://godbolt.org/z/84Erh5dhz

The benchmarks don't really tell me much. Maybe a slight improvement on the var radix.

Before:
```
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_10                     ... bench:      53,819 ns/iter (+/- 8,314)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_16                     ... bench:      57,265 ns/iter (+/- 10,730)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_2                      ... bench:      55,077 ns/iter (+/- 5,431)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_36                     ... bench:      56,549 ns/iter (+/- 3,248)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_var                    ... bench:      43,848 ns/iter (+/- 3,189)

test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_10                     ... bench:      51,707 ns/iter (+/- 10,946)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_16                     ... bench:      52,835 ns/iter (+/- 2,689)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_2                      ... bench:      51,012 ns/iter (+/- 2,746)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_36                     ... bench:      53,210 ns/iter (+/- 8,645)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_var                    ... bench:      40,386 ns/iter (+/- 4,711)

test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_10                     ... bench:      54,088 ns/iter (+/- 5,677)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_16                     ... bench:      55,972 ns/iter (+/- 17,229)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_2                      ... bench:      52,083 ns/iter (+/- 2,425)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_36                     ... bench:      54,132 ns/iter (+/- 1,548)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_var                    ... bench:      41,250 ns/iter (+/- 5,299)
```
After:
```
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_10                     ... bench:      48,907 ns/iter (+/- 19,449)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_16                     ... bench:      52,673 ns/iter (+/- 8,122)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_2                      ... bench:      48,509 ns/iter (+/- 2,885)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_36                     ... bench:      50,526 ns/iter (+/- 4,610)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_var                    ... bench:      38,618 ns/iter (+/- 3,180)

test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_10                     ... bench:      54,202 ns/iter (+/- 6,994)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_16                     ... bench:      56,585 ns/iter (+/- 8,448)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_2                      ... bench:      50,548 ns/iter (+/- 1,674)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_36                     ... bench:      52,749 ns/iter (+/- 2,576)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_var                    ... bench:      40,215 ns/iter (+/- 3,327)

test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_10                     ... bench:      50,233 ns/iter (+/- 22,272)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_16                     ... bench:      50,841 ns/iter (+/- 19,981)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_2                      ... bench:      50,386 ns/iter (+/- 4,555)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_36                     ... bench:      52,369 ns/iter (+/- 2,737)
test char::methods::bench_to_digit_radix_var                    ... bench:      40,417 ns/iter (+/- 2,766)
```

I removed the likely as it resulted in a few less instructions. (It's not been in there long - I added it in the last to_digit iteration).
2021-06-10 23:14:11 +00:00
Giles Cope
9c3d81e186
Further simplification of to_digit 2021-06-10 20:16:35 +01:00
bors
eab201df70 Auto merge of #86003 - pnkfelix:issue-84297-revert-81238, r=Mark-Simulacrum
Make copy/copy_nonoverlapping fn's again

Make copy/copy_nonoverlapping fn's again, rather than intrinsics.

This a short-term change to address issue #84297.

It effectively reverts PRs #81167 #81238 (and part of #82967), #83091, and parts of #79684.
2021-06-09 16:47:05 +00:00
Yuki Okushi
f923f73b9a
Rollup merge of #85930 - mominul:array_into_iter, r=m-ou-se
Update standard library for IntoIterator implementation of arrays

This PR partially resolves issue #84513 of updating the standard library part.

I haven't found any remaining doctest examples which are using iterators over e.g. &i32 instead of just i32 in the standard library. Can anyone point me to them if there's remaining any?

Thanks!

r? ```@m-ou-se```
2021-06-06 19:11:19 +09:00
Gary Guo
37647d1733 Move flt2dec::{Formatted, Part} to dedicated module
They are used by integer formatting as well and is not exclusive to float.
2021-06-06 02:54:51 +01:00
Felix S. Klock II
cebfcd3256 Revert tests added by PR 81167. 2021-06-04 16:44:28 -04:00
Yuki Okushi
0a12431962
Rollup merge of #85963 - m-ou-se:constructor-type-name, r=yaahc
Show `::{{constructor}}` in std::any::type_name().

Fix #84666

Before:
```
[src/main.rs:6] type_name::<T>() = "playground::Velocity"
[src/main.rs:6] type_name::<T>() = "playground::Velocity"
```

After:
```
[src/main.rs:6] type_name::<T>() = "scratchpad::Velocity::{{constructor}}"
[src/main.rs:6] type_name::<T>() = "scratchpad::Velocity"
```

cc ``@scottmcm``
2021-06-04 13:43:02 +09:00
Mara Bos
e3b19e5c25 Add test for issue 84666. 2021-06-03 16:13:45 +02:00
Muhammad Mominul Huque
507d97b26e Update expressions where we can use array's IntoIterator implementation 2021-06-02 16:09:04 +06:00
Muhammad Mominul Huque
01d4d46f66 Replace IntoIter::new with IntoIterator::into_iter in std 2021-06-02 16:09:04 +06:00
Jacob Pratt
35ce36812a
Unify feature flags as step_trait
While stdlib implementations of the unchecked methods require unchecked
math, there is no reason to gate it behind this for external users. The
reasoning for a separate `step_trait_ext` feature is unclear, and as
such has been merged as well.
2021-05-26 18:07:10 -04:00
Scott McMurray
65a0a8b386 Stabilize ops::ControlFlow (just the type) 2021-05-23 13:20:05 -07:00
Scott McMurray
58a85d55e8 #[cfg(bootstrap)] out the v1 try_trait stuff 2021-05-19 13:32:15 -07:00
Scott McMurray
266a72637a Simple library test updates 2021-05-06 11:37:45 -07:00
Yuki Okushi
46b67ab0f9
Rollup merge of #84105 - WaffleLapkin:stabilize_array_from_ref, r=m-ou-se
stabilize `core::array::{from_ref,from_mut}` in `1.53.0`

I didn't get any response in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/77101#issuecomment-761831104, so I figured out I can try opening stabilization pr.

---

This PR stabilizes following functions:
```rust
// core::array
pub fn from_ref<T>(s: &T) -> &[T; 1];
pub fn from_mut<T>(s: &mut T) -> &mut [T; 1];
```

Functions are similar to already stabilized `core::slice::{`[`from_ref`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/slice/fn.from_ref.html),[`from_mut`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/slice/fn.from_mut.html)`}` and were unstable without any problems/questions for a while now.

---

resolves #77101

``@rustbot`` modify labels: +T-libs
2021-04-25 01:53:10 +09:00
bors
ccf171242b Auto merge of #77704 - AnthonyMikh:slice_index_with_ops_bound_pair, r=m-ou-se
Implement indexing slices with pairs of core::ops::Bound<usize>

Closes #49976.

I am not sure about code duplication between `check_range` and `into_maybe_range`. Should be former implemented in terms of the latter? Also this PR doesn't address code duplication between `impl SliceIndex for Range*`.
2021-04-22 15:36:27 +00:00
Mara Bos
49a5c80a3b
Rollup merge of #84390 - m-ou-se:make-debug-non-exhaustive-without-fields-a-little-bit-less-verbose, r=kennytm
Format `Struct { .. }` on one line even with `{:#?}`.

The result of `debug_struct("A").finish_non_exhaustive()` before this change:
```
A {
    ..
}
```
And after this change:
```
A { .. }
```

If there's any fields, the result stays unchanged:
```
A {
    field: value,
    ..
}
2021-04-21 23:06:21 +02:00
Mara Bos
82dc73b1ae Format Struct { .. } on one line even with {:#?}. 2021-04-21 13:50:56 +02:00
Simon Sapin
4d683c0292 Allow use of deprecated std::raw in a test for that feature 2021-04-15 19:16:18 +02:00
AnthonyMikh
7efba4f982 Implement indexing slices with pairs of ops::Bound<usize> 2021-04-13 09:57:24 -04:00
Dylan DPC
3d6a364e33
Rollup merge of #84084 - m-ou-se:stabilize-zero, r=scottmcm
Stabilize duration_zero.

FCP here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/73544#issuecomment-817201305
2021-04-13 11:10:40 +02:00
bors
7ce470fd9b Auto merge of #84082 - andjo403:stabilize_nonzero_leading_trailing_zeros, r=m-ou-se
Stabilize nonzero_leading_trailing_zeros

Stabilizing nonzero_leading_trailing_zeros and due to this also stabilizing the intrinsic cttz_nonzero

FCP finished here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/79143#issuecomment-817216153
`@rustbot` modify labels: +T-libs

Closes #79143
2021-04-13 03:18:10 +00:00
Mara Bos
d1e23b8af8 Stabilize duration_zero. 2021-04-12 16:32:56 +02:00
bors
d68f7a2f50 Auto merge of #84090 - marmeladema:stabilize-duration-saturating-ops, r=m-ou-se
Stabilize feature `duration_saturating_ops`

FCP here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76416#issuecomment-817201314

Closes #76416

r? `@m-ou-se`
2021-04-12 05:44:25 +00:00
Waffle
740b0529fb stabilize core::array::{from_ref,from_mut} 2021-04-11 22:06:32 +03:00
Andreas Jonson
12249acdc8 Stabilize nonzero_leading_trailing_zeros 2021-04-11 19:15:55 +02:00
marmeladema
7d89148385 Stabilize feature duration_saturating_ops
Closes #76416
2021-04-11 11:34:42 +01:00
Tomasz Miąsko
60780e438a Remove FixedSizeArray 2021-04-11 00:00:00 +00:00
Dylan DPC
461297e3fd
Rollup merge of #81938 - lukaslueg:stab_peek_mut, r=Amanieu
Stabilize `peekable_peek_mut`

Resolves #78302. Also adds some documentation on `std::iter::Iterator::peekable()` regarding the new method.

The feature was added in #77491 in Nov' 20, which is recently, but the feature seems reasonably small. Never did a stabilization-pr, excuse my ignorance if there is a protocol I'm not aware of.
2021-04-08 20:29:57 +02:00
bors
ef2ef926a5 Auto merge of #81047 - glittershark:stabilize-cmp-min-max-by, r=kodraus
Stabilize cmp_min_max_by

I would like to propose cmp::{min_by, min_by_key, max_by, max_by_key}
for stabilization.

These are relatively simple and seemingly uncontroversial functions and
have been unchanged in unstable for a while now.

Closes: #64460
2021-04-07 18:02:21 +00:00
Griffin Smith
462f86da9a Stabilize cmp_min_max_by
I would like to propose cmp::{min_by, min_by_key, max_by, max_by_key}
for stabilization.

These are relatively simple and seemingly uncontroversial functions and
have been unchanged in unstable for a while now.
2021-04-07 10:29:04 -04:00
lukaslueg
72796a7c36
Merge branch 'master' into stab_peek_mut 2021-04-06 18:23:21 +02:00
Mark Rousskov
b3a4f91b8d Bump cfgs 2021-04-04 14:57:05 -04:00
bors
aef11409b4 Auto merge of #78618 - workingjubilee:ieee754-fmt, r=m-ou-se
Add IEEE 754 compliant fmt/parse of -0, infinity, NaN

This pull request improves the Rust float formatting/parsing libraries to comply with IEEE 754's formatting expectations around certain special values, namely signed zero, the infinities, and NaN. It also adds IEEE 754 compliance tests that, while less stringent in certain places than many of the existing flt2dec/dec2flt capability tests, are intended to serve as the beginning of a roadmap to future compliance with the standard. Some relevant documentation is also adjusted with clarifying remarks.

This PR follows from discussion in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1074, and closes #24623.

The most controversial change here is likely to be that -0 is now printed as -0. Allow me to explain: While there appears to be community support for an opt-in toggle of printing floats as if they exist in the naively expected domain of numbers, i.e. not the extended reals (where floats live), IEEE 754-2019 is clear that a float converted to a string should be capable of being transformed into the original floating point bit-pattern when it satisfies certain conditions (namely, when it is an actual numeric value i.e. not a NaN and the original and destination float width are the same). -0 is given special attention here as a value that should have its sign preserved. In addition, the vast majority of other programming languages not only output `-0` but output `-0.0` here.

While IEEE 754 offers a broad leeway in how to handle producing what it calls a "decimal character sequence", it is clear that the operations a language provides should be capable of round tripping, and it is confusing to advertise the f32 and f64 types as binary32 and binary64 yet have the most basic way of producing a string and then reading it back into a floating point number be non-conformant with the standard. Further, existing documentation suggested that e.g. -0 would be printed with -0 regardless of the presence of the `+` fmt character, but it prints "+0" instead if given such (which was what led to the opening of #24623).

There are other parsing and formatting issues for floating point numbers which prevent Rust from complying with the standard, as well as other well-documented challenges on the arithmetic level, but I hope that this can be the beginning of motion towards solving those challenges.
2021-03-27 10:40:16 +00:00