- 
                Notifications
    
You must be signed in to change notification settings  - Fork 13.9k
 
Add append() and split_off() to DList as per coll. reform. #20406
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
Conversation
| 
          
 (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)  | 
    
| 
           This is my first code PR, so I hope I haven't messed it up!  | 
    
| 
           This should just replace the old   | 
    
        
          
                src/libcollections/dlist.rs
              
                Outdated
          
        
      There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure destructively is the right word here. "moves" seems more right.
        
          
                src/libcollections/dlist.rs
              
                Outdated
          
        
      There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would make this an assert!(len <= at, "message")
| 
           Done first-pass review.  | 
    
f15cc5b    to
    60d2b72      
    Compare
  
    | 
           @gankro Thanks for the quick review! I fixed all of the issues you've noted.  | 
    
60d2b72    to
    678b857      
    Compare
  
    | 
           This LGTM, but I like to get a secondary review for most collections code (since it's tricksy). r? @huonw  | 
    
678b857    to
    8ce6e06      
    Compare
  
    There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should, or does?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I just followed the convention of some other doc strings in the file that mention asymptotic performance (e.g., https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/20406/files#diff-4103b030c3b97fcdc52e866d1cb300fbR363). I'm indifferent to the phrasing though, so if you insist, I'll change it to "This operation computes in O(n) time."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
fwiw I'm happy to leave it like this, to be handled by a more comprehensive collection doc conventions pass (which I'm sort-of working on).
| 
           r=me with fixes  | 
    
8ce6e06    to
    245b0b5      
    Compare
  
    245b0b5    to
    d0bc031      
    Compare
  
    | 
           @cmr Oops, my bad! I removed the submodule update.  | 
    
| 
           @cmr does this meet your requirements?  | 
    
| 
           Yes  | 
    
Implements the `append()` and `split_off()` methods proposed by the collections reform part 2 RFC. RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#509 Tracking issue: #19986
Implements the
append()andsplit_off()methods proposed by the collections reform part 2 RFC.RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#509
Tracking issue: #19986