-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112750
Closed
Closed
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112750
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
At the moment, documentation of std::io::Write::write indicates that call to it ‘represents at most one attempt to write to any wrapped object’. It seems that such wording was put there to contrast it with pre-1.0 interface which attempted to write all the data (it has since been changed in [RFC 517]). However, the requirement puts unnecessary constraints and may complicate adaptors which perform non-trivial transformations on the data. For example, they may maintain an internal buffer which needs to be written out before the write method accepts more data. It might be natural to code the method such that it flushes the buffer and then grabs another chunk of user data. With the current wording in the documentation, the adaptor would be forced to return Ok(0). This commit softens the wording such that implementations can choose code structure which makes most sense for their particular use case. While at it, elaborate on the meaning of `Ok(0)` return pointing out that the write_all methods interprets it as an error. [RFC 517]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/0517-io-os-reform.html
Co-authored-by: Andrew Gallant <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jacob Lifshay <[email protected]>
It was already filtered out for emscripten, but wasi doesn't need dlmalloc either since it reuses `unix/alloc.rs`.
io: soften ‘at most one write attempt’ requirement in io::Write::write At the moment, documentation of std::io::Write::write indicates that call to it ‘represents at most one attempt to write to any wrapped object’. It seems that such wording was put there to contrast it with pre-1.0 interface which attempted to write all the data (it has since been changed in [RFC 517]). However, the requirement puts unnecessary constraints and may complicate adaptors which perform non-trivial transformations on the data. For example, they may maintain an internal buffer which needs to be written out before the write method accepts more data. It might be natural to code the method such that it flushes the buffer and then grabs another chunk of user data. With the current wording in the documentation, the adaptor would be forced to return Ok(0). This commit softens the wording such that implementations can choose code structure which makes most sense for their particular use case. While at it, elaborate on the meaning of `Ok(0)` return pointing out that the write_all methods interprets it as an error. [RFC 517]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/0517-io-os-reform.html
Launch a non-unwinding panic for misaligned pointer deref This panic already never unwinds, but that's only because it always hits the unwind guard that's created by our `UnwindAction::Terminate`. Hitting the unwind guard generates a huge double-panic backtrace. Now we generate a normal-looking panic message when this check is hit. r? `@thomcc`
Alter `Display` for `Ipv6Addr` for IPv4-compatible addresses ACP: rust-lang/libs-team#239
… r=lcnr Move WF/ConstEvaluatable goal to clause It can show up in a param-env, so I think it needs to be a clause kind. r? `@lcnr` or `@oli-obk`
…lacrum std: only depend on dlmalloc for wasm*-unknown It was already filtered out for emscripten, but wasi doesn't need dlmalloc either since it reuses `unix/alloc.rs`.
bootstrap: check for dry run when copying env vars for msvc The new synthetic targets for mir-opt blessing aren't added to `builder.cc` during dry runs, causing `x.py test tests/mir-opt --bless` to crash on MSVC when it tries to copy env vars to the C compiler invocation. This PR adds a check for dry run to fix the panic.
…compiler-errors Make `Bound::predicates` use `Clause` Part of rust-lang#107250 `Bound::predicates` returns an iterator over `Binder<_, Clause>` instead of `Predicate`. I tried updating `explicit_predicates_of` as well, but it seems that it needs a lot more change than I thought. Will do it in a separate PR instead.
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
T-bootstrap
Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap)
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-libs
Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-rustdoc
Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
WG-trait-system-refactor
The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver)
rollup
A PR which is a rollup
labels
Jun 18, 2023
@bors r+ rollup=never p=7 |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
and removed
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
labels
Jun 18, 2023
⌛ Testing commit 890e0da with merge facf96eafb185ed2a65d650b8f1169fdd5abe396... |
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
and removed
S-waiting-on-bors
Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
labels
Jun 18, 2023
Perhaps spurious? @bors retry |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
and removed
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
labels
Jun 18, 2023
Actually nvm, one of the rollup prs is being tested |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
rollup
A PR which is a rollup
S-waiting-on-bors
Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
T-bootstrap
Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap)
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-libs
Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-rustdoc
Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
WG-trait-system-refactor
The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver)
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:
Display
forIpv6Addr
for IPv4-compatible addresses #112606 (AlterDisplay
forIpv6Addr
for IPv4-compatible addresses)Bound::predicates
useClause
#112734 (MakeBound::predicates
useClause
)r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup