Skip to content

Conversation

iblech and others added 30 commits February 6, 2015 23:14
Without such a clarification, people who know and love closures (for instance
programmers with a Haskell background) might fear that types would have to
be declared in closures and that therefore using closures would be much more
unwieldy.
The `Arguments::new_v1_formatted` function was accidentally left out when this
module was stabilized.
This brings it in line with its namesake in `std::io`.

[breaking-change]
Some newcomers might look for a "flatMap" method on Option. Include the
reference so that searching the page would find "and_then".
When matching against strings/slices, we call the comparison function
for strings, which takes two string slices by value. The slices are
passed in memory, and currently we just pass in a pointer to the
original slice. That can cause misoptimizations because we emit a call
to llvm.lifetime.end for all by-value arguments at the end of a
function, which in this case marks the original slice as dead.

So we need to properly create copies of the slices to pass them to the
comparison function.

Fixes rust-lang#22008
The other cases: `concat_idents!`, `log_syntax!`, and `trace_macros!`,
(these macros, with `asm!`, are handled (eagerly) in feature_gate.rs).
Requested by Niko in rust-lang#22200 (and is good to have anyway)
 - We shouldn't be using `check_name` here at all
 - `contains_name(ref_slice(foo), bar)` is redundant, `contains_name` just iterates over its first arg and calls `check_name`
 - match would be better than a bunch of ifs
This redux of CONTRIBUTING.md adds in more information, including
subsuming both compliment-bugreport.md and Note-development-policy
in the wiki.

I only glanced at the broad TOC of Note-development-policy, and did
not use the text as the basis for the re-write. This will then address
the last outstanding part of rust-lang#5831.
The test "signal_reported_right" send a signal `1` to `/bin/sh`, and check
the status code to check if the signal is reported right.

Under OpenBSD, the signal `1` (`SIGHUP`) is catched by `/bin/sh`,
resulting the test failed.

Use the uncatchable signal `9` (`SIGKILL`) for test.
This commit mostly replaces some of the uses of os::args with env::args.
…eklabnik

This is a more introductory document, suitable for Part II. The arcane details move to an "Advanced macros" chapter in Part III.

Conflicts:
	src/doc/trpl/macros.md
@Manishearth Manishearth changed the title Rollup of 21 pull requests Rollup of 20 pull requests Feb 17, 2015
@dotdash
Copy link
Contributor

dotdash commented Feb 17, 2015

@bors r=pnkfelix a672498

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 17, 2015

⌛ Testing commit a672498 with merge 5e92d33...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 17, 2015

💔 Test failed - auto-win-32-nopt-t

@nagisa
Copy link
Member

nagisa commented Feb 17, 2015

@Manishearth this patch should fix the other windows failure:

From b1f8e58045ec798abcd0d36d93d59f60b0595e52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Simonas Kazlauskas <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:50:18 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] use ops::Range instead of iter::Range

---
 src/libstd/sys/windows/os.rs | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/libstd/sys/windows/os.rs b/src/libstd/sys/windows/os.rs
index 6aa1ac0..502d70d 100644
--- a/src/libstd/sys/windows/os.rs
+++ b/src/libstd/sys/windows/os.rs
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ use os::windows::*;
 use error::Error as StdError;
 use ffi::{OsString, OsStr, AsOsStr};
 use fmt;
-use iter::Range;
+use ops::Range;
 use libc::types::os::arch::extra::LPWCH;
 use libc::{self, c_int, c_void};
 use mem;
@@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ pub fn args() -> Args {
         let lpCmdLine = c::GetCommandLineW();
         let szArgList = c::CommandLineToArgvW(lpCmdLine, &mut nArgs);

-        Args { cur: szArgList, range: range(0, nArgs as isize) }
+        Args { cur: szArgList, range: 0..(nArgs as isize) }
     }
 }

-- 
2.3.0

You can also merge it from the PR if you want, but you should keep in mind I didn’t test it on windows either.

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Contributor

(i am looking into whether I can recover a useful rollup PR from this work without too much effort)

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r=10f51fc

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 17, 2015

🙀 You have the wrong number! Please try again with 10f51fc.

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Contributor

@bors 10f51fc

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+ 10f51fc

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 17, 2015

⌛ Testing commit 10f51fc with merge 076a920...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 17, 2015

💔 Test failed - auto-mac-64-nopt-t

@eddyb
Copy link
Member

eddyb commented Feb 17, 2015

@bors r+ 096b105

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 17, 2015

⌛ Testing commit 096b105 with merge b2c68cd...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 17, 2015

💔 Test failed - auto-mac-64-nopt-t

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

I'll take this over, starting anew with lots more PRs as well.

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Contributor

see #22475 (which seems to have ended with a manual merge, what a saga!

@Manishearth
Copy link
Member Author

Yeah, I've been watching that one, thanks :)

@Manishearth Manishearth deleted the rollup branch February 18, 2015 12:54
@Centril Centril added the rollup A PR which is a rollup label Oct 2, 2019
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
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.