Add c_size_t and c_ssize_t to std::os::raw.
#88340
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
Looks good to me. r=me once you file the tracking issue and change the PR to use that issue number. |
Open
3 tasks
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 5b25de5 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
@bors r- Just saw the names attached to the emoji on the top post. @petrochenkov @jhpratt Can you elaborate? |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
I have no problem with the PR itself, I just don't think the API is necessary. If you disagree, merge it — it's not like it's insta-stable or anything. |
|
Actually, never mind. I didn't realize until just now that the |
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 5b25de5 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Dylan-DPC-zz
pushed a commit
to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 26, 2021
Add `c_size_t` and `c_ssize_t` to `std::os::raw`. Apparently these aren't guaranteed to be the same, and are merely "always the same in practice" (see https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-lang.2Fwg-unsafe-code-guidelines/topic/.60usize.60.20vs.20.60size_t.60). This is a big footgun, but I suspect it can be alleviated if we expose this and start migrating people to it in advance of any platforms that ever have this as different. I'll file a tracking issue after this gets some traction.
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 26, 2021
Add `c_size_t` and `c_ssize_t` to `std::os::raw`. Apparently these aren't guaranteed to be the same, and are merely "always the same in practice" (see https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-lang.2Fwg-unsafe-code-guidelines/topic/.60usize.60.20vs.20.60size_t.60). This is a big footgun, but I suspect it can be alleviated if we expose this and start migrating people to it in advance of any platforms that ever have this as different. I'll file a tracking issue after this gets some traction.
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 27, 2021
…arth Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#87832 (Fix debugger stepping behavior with `match` expressions) - rust-lang#88123 (Make spans for tuple patterns in E0023 more precise) - rust-lang#88215 (Reland rust-lang#83738: "rustdoc: Don't load all extern crates unconditionally") - rust-lang#88216 (Don't stabilize creation of TryReserveError instances) - rust-lang#88270 (Handle type ascription type ops in NLL HRTB diagnostics) - rust-lang#88289 (Fixes for LLVM change 0f45c16) - rust-lang#88320 (type_implements_trait consider obligation failure on overflow) - rust-lang#88332 (Add argument types tait tests) - rust-lang#88340 (Add `c_size_t` and `c_ssize_t` to `std::os::raw`.) - rust-lang#88346 (Revert "Add type of a let tait test impl trait straight in let") - rust-lang#88348 (Add field types tait tests) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Apparently these aren't guaranteed to be the same, and are merely "always the same in practice" (see https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-lang.2Fwg-unsafe-code-guidelines/topic/.60usize.60.20vs.20.60size_t.60).
This is a big footgun, but I suspect it can be alleviated if we expose this and start migrating people to it in advance of any platforms that ever have this as different.
I'll file a tracking issue after this gets some traction.