Remove insignificant notes from CStr documentation #67985
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
These notes are about a distinction that is not going to be observable in the API. Whether or not the UTF-8 check knows the string length ahead of time, these methods require linear time.
|
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
So basically to summarize this is saying that because UTF-8 validation is still going to have to walk the entire CStr, there's no reason to note that the walk isn't O(1) (and will change in the future)? If so, r=me. |
|
Yes, exactly. @bors r=Mark-Simulacrum rollup |
|
📌 Commit 48add54 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
JohnTitor
added a commit
to JohnTitor/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 8, 2020
Remove insignificant notes from CStr documentation The to_str and to_string_lossy methods contain a note about the behavior possibly changing in the future. But those notes are referring to a distinction that is not observable in the API. Whether or not the UTF-8 check knows the string length ahead of time, these methods require linear time.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 8, 2020
Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - #67774 (Try statx for all linux-gnu target.) - #67781 (Move `is_min_const_fn` query to librustc_mir.) - #67798 (Remove wrong advice about spin locks from `spin_loop_hint` docs) - #67849 (Add a check for swapped words when we can't find an identifier) - #67875 (Distinguish between private items and hidden items in rustdoc) - #67887 (`Option::{expect,unwrap}` and `Result::{expect, expect_err, unwrap, unwrap_err}` have `#[track_caller]`) - #67955 (rustdoc: Remove more `#[doc(cfg(..))]` duplicates) - #67977 (Updates for VxWorks) - #67985 (Remove insignificant notes from CStr documentation) - #68003 (ci: fix wrong shared.sh import for publish_toolstate) Failed merges: - #67820 (Parse the syntax described in RFC 2632) - #67979 (Move `intravisit` => `rustc_hir` + misc cleanup) r? @ghost
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 8, 2020
Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - #67774 (Try statx for all linux-gnu target.) - #67781 (Move `is_min_const_fn` query to librustc_mir.) - #67798 (Remove wrong advice about spin locks from `spin_loop_hint` docs) - #67849 (Add a check for swapped words when we can't find an identifier) - #67875 (Distinguish between private items and hidden items in rustdoc) - #67887 (`Option::{expect,unwrap}` and `Result::{expect, expect_err, unwrap, unwrap_err}` have `#[track_caller]`) - #67955 (rustdoc: Remove more `#[doc(cfg(..))]` duplicates) - #67977 (Updates for VxWorks) - #67985 (Remove insignificant notes from CStr documentation) - #68003 (ci: fix wrong shared.sh import for publish_toolstate) Failed merges: - #67820 (Parse the syntax described in RFC 2632) - #67979 (Move `intravisit` => `rustc_hir` + misc cleanup) r? @ghost
dtolnay
added
A-docs
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# 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.
The to_str and to_string_lossy methods contain a note about the behavior possibly changing in the future. But those notes are referring to a distinction that is not observable in the API. Whether or not the UTF-8 check knows the string length ahead of time, these methods require linear time.