Clarify docs for Read::read's return value #82892
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
|
r? @KodrAus (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 9dfda62 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
Mar 18, 2021
Clarify docs for Read::read's return value Right now the docs for `Read::read`'s return value are phrased in a way that makes it easy for the reader to assume that the return value is never larger than the passed buffer. This PR clarifies that this is a requirement for implementations of the trait, but that callers have to expect a buggy yet safe implementation failing to do so, especially if unchecked accesses to the buffer are done afterwards. I fell into this trap recently, and when I noticed, I looked at the docs again and had the feeling that I might not have been the first one to miss this. The same issue of trusting the return value of `read` was also present in std itself for about 2.5 years and only fixed recently, see rust-lang#80895. I hope that clarifying the docs might help others to avoid this issue.
Dylan-DPC-zz
pushed a commit
to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2021
Clarify docs for Read::read's return value Right now the docs for `Read::read`'s return value are phrased in a way that makes it easy for the reader to assume that the return value is never larger than the passed buffer. This PR clarifies that this is a requirement for implementations of the trait, but that callers have to expect a buggy yet safe implementation failing to do so, especially if unchecked accesses to the buffer are done afterwards. I fell into this trap recently, and when I noticed, I looked at the docs again and had the feeling that I might not have been the first one to miss this. The same issue of trusting the return value of `read` was also present in std itself for about 2.5 years and only fixed recently, see rust-lang#80895. I hope that clarifying the docs might help others to avoid this issue.
Dylan-DPC-zz
pushed a commit
to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2021
Clarify docs for Read::read's return value Right now the docs for `Read::read`'s return value are phrased in a way that makes it easy for the reader to assume that the return value is never larger than the passed buffer. This PR clarifies that this is a requirement for implementations of the trait, but that callers have to expect a buggy yet safe implementation failing to do so, especially if unchecked accesses to the buffer are done afterwards. I fell into this trap recently, and when I noticed, I looked at the docs again and had the feeling that I might not have been the first one to miss this. The same issue of trusting the return value of `read` was also present in std itself for about 2.5 years and only fixed recently, see rust-lang#80895. I hope that clarifying the docs might help others to avoid this issue.
JohnTitor
added a commit
to JohnTitor/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2021
Clarify docs for Read::read's return value Right now the docs for `Read::read`'s return value are phrased in a way that makes it easy for the reader to assume that the return value is never larger than the passed buffer. This PR clarifies that this is a requirement for implementations of the trait, but that callers have to expect a buggy yet safe implementation failing to do so, especially if unchecked accesses to the buffer are done afterwards. I fell into this trap recently, and when I noticed, I looked at the docs again and had the feeling that I might not have been the first one to miss this. The same issue of trusting the return value of `read` was also present in std itself for about 2.5 years and only fixed recently, see rust-lang#80895. I hope that clarifying the docs might help others to avoid this issue.
Dylan-DPC-zz
pushed a commit
to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2021
Clarify docs for Read::read's return value Right now the docs for `Read::read`'s return value are phrased in a way that makes it easy for the reader to assume that the return value is never larger than the passed buffer. This PR clarifies that this is a requirement for implementations of the trait, but that callers have to expect a buggy yet safe implementation failing to do so, especially if unchecked accesses to the buffer are done afterwards. I fell into this trap recently, and when I noticed, I looked at the docs again and had the feeling that I might not have been the first one to miss this. The same issue of trusting the return value of `read` was also present in std itself for about 2.5 years and only fixed recently, see rust-lang#80895. I hope that clarifying the docs might help others to avoid this issue.
This was referenced Mar 19, 2021
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2021
Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#82500 (Reuse `std::sys::unsupported::pipe` on `hermit`) - rust-lang#82759 (Remove unwrap_none/expect_none from compiler/.) - rust-lang#82846 (rustdoc: allow list syntax for #[doc(alias)] attributes) - rust-lang#82892 (Clarify docs for Read::read's return value) - rust-lang#83179 (Extend `proc_macro_back_compat` lint to `actix-web`) - rust-lang#83197 (Move some test-only code to test files) - rust-lang#83208 (Fix gitattibutes for old git versions) - rust-lang#83215 (Deprecate std::os::haiku::raw, which accidentally wasn't deprecated) - rust-lang#83230 (Remove unnecessary `forward_inner_docs` hack) - rust-lang#83236 (Upgrade memmap to memmap2) - rust-lang#83270 (Fix typo/inaccuracy in the documentation of Iterator::skip_while) 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.
Right now the docs for
Read::read's return value are phrased in a way that makes it easy for the reader to assume that the return value is never larger than the passed buffer. This PR clarifies that this is a requirement for implementations of the trait, but that callers have to expect a buggy yet safe implementation failing to do so, especially if unchecked accesses to the buffer are done afterwards.I fell into this trap recently, and when I noticed, I looked at the docs again and had the feeling that I might not have been the first one to miss this.
The same issue of trusting the return value of
readwas also present in std itself for about 2.5 years and only fixed recently, see #80895.I hope that clarifying the docs might help others to avoid this issue.