Add io::Cursor::{remaining, remaining_slice, is_empty}
#86037
Conversation
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @yaahc (or someone else) soon. If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
No RFC is necessary I think, but we should setup a tracking issue. The APIs look good to me and I'm happy to have these methods. I'm a little bothered by the inconsistency with the Curious what the rest of @rust-lang/libs thinks. |
soerenmeier
changed the title
io::Cursor::{remaining, is_empty}io::Cursor::{remaining, remaining_slice, is_empty}
|
Looks good, thank you again @soerenmeier. @bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 664bde0 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Add `io::Cursor::{remaining, remaining_slice, is_empty}`
Tracking issue: rust-lang#86369
I came across an inconvenience when answering the following [Stack Overflow](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67831170) question.
To get the remaining slice you have to call `buff.fill_buf().unwrap()`. Which in my opinion doesn't really tell you what is returned (in the context of Cursor). To improve readability and convenience when using Cursor i propose adding the method `remaining`.
The next thing i found inconvenient (unnecessary long) was detecting if the cursor reached the end. There are a few ways this can be achieved right now:
- `buff.fill_buf().unwrap().is_empty()`
- `buff.position() >= buff.get_ref().len()`
- `buff.bytes().next().is_none()`
Which all seem a bit unintuitive, hidden in trait documentations or just a bit long for such a simple task.
Therefor i propose another method called `is_empty`, maybe with another name, since this one may leave room for interpretation on what really is empty (the underlying slice, the remaining slice or maybe the position).
Since it seemed easier to create this PR instead of an RFC i did that, if an RFC is wanted, i can close this PR and write an RFC first.
Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#85054 (Revert SGX inline asm syntax) - rust-lang#85182 (Move `available_concurrency` implementation to `sys`) - rust-lang#86037 (Add `io::Cursor::{remaining, remaining_slice, is_empty}`) - rust-lang#86114 (Reopen rust-lang#79692 (Format symbols under shared frames)) - rust-lang#86297 (Allow to pass arguments to rustdoc-gui tool) - rust-lang#86334 (Resolve type aliases to the type they point to in intra-doc links) - rust-lang#86367 (Fix comment about rustc_inherit_overflow_checks in abs().) - rust-lang#86381 (Add regression test for issue rust-lang#39161) - rust-lang#86387 (Remove `#[allow(unused_lifetimes)]` which is now unnecessary) - rust-lang#86398 (Add regression test for issue rust-lang#54685) - rust-lang#86493 (Say "this enum variant takes"/"this struct takes" instead of "this function takes") Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Remove unstable `io::Cursor::remaining` Adding `io::Cursor::remaining` in rust-lang#86037 caused a conflict with the implementation of `bytes::Buf` for `io::Cursor`, leading to an error in nightly, see rust-lang#86369 (comment). This fixes the error by temporarily removing the `remaining` function. r? `@yaahc`
Tracking issue: #86369
I came across an inconvenience when answering the following Stack Overflow question.
To get the remaining slice you have to call
buff.fill_buf().unwrap(). Which in my opinion doesn't really tell you what is returned (in the context of Cursor). To improve readability and convenience when using Cursor i propose adding the methodremaining.The next thing i found inconvenient (unnecessary long) was detecting if the cursor reached the end. There are a few ways this can be achieved right now:
buff.fill_buf().unwrap().is_empty()buff.position() >= buff.get_ref().len()buff.bytes().next().is_none()Which all seem a bit unintuitive, hidden in trait documentations or just a bit long for such a simple task.
Therefor i propose another method called
is_empty, maybe with another name, since this one may leave room for interpretation on what really is empty (the underlying slice, the remaining slice or maybe the position).Since it seemed easier to create this PR instead of an RFC i did that, if an RFC is wanted, i can close this PR and write an RFC first.