Rollup of 8 pull requests #89226
Closed
Rollup of 8 pull requests #89226
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
It is used exactly once and can be replaced with the equally fast .as_str().len()
Avoids a bunch of manual pointer manipulation.
Currently, with the new 2021 edition, if a closure captures all of the fields of an upvar, we'll drop those fields in the order they are used within the closure instead of the normal drop order (the definition order of the fields in the type). This changes that so we sort the captured fields by the definition order which causes them to drop in that same order as well. Fixes rust-lang/project-rfc-2229#42
Co-authored-by: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>
…lbini Add 1.56.0 release notes Notable things: * Rustdoc section currently absent, for lack of things to call out that I could find. It seems like rust-lang#87451 is the only potential candidate, but that seems like more of a bugfix and doesn't seem to warrant inclusion to me. But we can add it if desired. As with the 1.55.0 release notes, my intent is to leave this open for approximately 1-2 weeks at the early part of the cycle, and then merge it in (after fixing any feedback). Further iteration can happen in subsequent issues (and PRs). [Rendered](https://github.com/Mark-Simulacrum/rust/blob/relnotes/RELEASES.md)
…akis Be explicit about using Binder::dummy This is somewhat of a late followup to the binder refactor PR. It removes `ToPredicate` and `ToPolyTraitImpls` that hide the use of `Binder::dummy`. While this does make code a bit more verbose, it allows us be more careful about where we create binders. Another alternative here might be to add a new trait `ToBinder` or something with a `dummy()` fn. Which could still allow grepping but allows doing something like `trait_ref.dummy()` (but I also wonder if longer-term, it would be better to be even more explicit with a `bind_with_vars(ty::List::empty())` *but* that's not clear yet. r? `@nikomatsakis`
…lwoerister Avoid a couple of Symbol::as_str calls in cg_llvm This should improve performance a tiny bit. Also remove `Symbol::len` and make `SymbolIndex` private.
…nagisa,bjorn3 Simplify scoped_thread Avoids a bunch of manual pointer manipulation in favor of using the appropriate std API.
…ikomatsakis [rfc 2229] Drop fully captured upvars in the same order as the regular drop code Currently, with the new 2021 edition, if a closure captures all of the fields of an upvar, we'll drop those fields in the order they are used within the closure instead of the normal drop order (the definition order of the fields in the type). This changes that so we sort the captured fields by the definition order which causes them to drop in that same order as well. Fixes rust-lang/project-rfc-2229#42 r? `@nikomatsakis`
Add missing time complexities to linked_list.rs Most functions in LinkedList have time complexities in their description: Like push front: ``` Adds an element first in the list. This operation should compute in O(1) time. ``` Time complexities were missing for the following, so I've added them in this PR: contains: O(n) front: O(1) front_mut: O(1) back: O(1) back_mut: O(1)
…-rust-tools, r=jyn514 Enable "generate-link-to-definition" option on rust tools docs as well Just realized that we enable the option for the compiler crates, but we don't have it for rustdoc and the other tools documentation... Part of rust-lang#89095. cc `@rust-lang/rustdoc` r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
…bank Give better error for `macro_rules! name!` r? `@estebank` `@rustbot` modify labels: +A-diagnostics +A-parser
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 3f43f22 has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
@bors r=Manishearth rollup=never p=1 |
|
💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.
|
|
📌 Commit 3f43f22 has been approved by |
|
#89208 has changed since this rollup was created. Can we regenerate this rollup? |
|
ah. @bors r- |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
Thanks @workingjubilee! 🙂 |
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.
Successful merges:
macro_rules! name!#89221 (Give better error formacro_rules! name!)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup