Skip to content

Rollup of 5 pull requests #97667

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Jun 3, 2022
Merged

Rollup of 5 pull requests #97667

merged 10 commits into from
Jun 3, 2022

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

lcnr and others added 10 commits June 1, 2022 20:36
…=GuillaumeGomez

rustdoc: Add more test coverage

Related issue rust-lang#91113
…ding-where-clauses, r=lcnr

Fix wrong suggestion for adding where clauses

closes rust-lang#97576
don't use a `span_note` for ignored impls

Searching for the `derive` isn't too difficult as it's right above the field definition.

By using a span these errors are a lot more verbose than they should be, which is especially annoying as one can end up with a lot of `dead_code` warnings.
…n-docs, r=thomcc

Improve documentation for constructors of pinned `Box`es

Adds a cross-references between `Box::pin` and `Box::into_pin` (and other related methods, i.e. the equivalent `From` implementation, and the unstable `pin_in` method), in particular now that `into_pin` [was stabilized](rust-lang#97397). The main goal is to further improve visibility of the fact that `Box<T> -> Pin<Box<T>>` conversion exits in the first place, and that `Box::pin(x)` is – essentially – just a convenience function for `Box::into_pin(Box::new(x))`

The motivating context why I think this is important is even experienced Rust users overlooking the existence this kind of conversion, [e.g. in this thread on IRLO](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-rfc-function-variants/16732/7?u=steffahn); and also the fact that that discussion brought up that there would be a bunch of Box-construction methods "missing" such as e.g. methods with fallible allocation a la "`Box::try_pin`", and similar; while those are in fact *not* necessary, because you can use `Box::into_pin(Box::try_new(x)?)` instead.

I have *not* included explicit mention of methods (e.g. `try_new`) in the docs of stable methods (e.g. `into_pin`). (Referring to unstable API in stable API docs would be bad style IMO.) Stable examples I have in mind with the statement "constructing a (pinned) Box in a different way than with `Box::new`" are things like cloning a `Box`, or `Box::from_raw`. If/when `try_new` would get stabilized, it would become a very good concrete example use-case of `Box::into_pin` IMO.
@rustbot rustbot added T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Jun 2, 2022
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 2, 2022

📌 Commit 5b64aab has been approved by matthiaskrgr

@bors bors added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Jun 2, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 3, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 5b64aab with merge 20ad820...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 3, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing 20ad820 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jun 3, 2022
@bors bors merged commit 20ad820 into rust-lang:master Jun 3, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.63.0 milestone Jun 3, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (20ad820): comparison url.

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results
  • Primary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regressions found
  • Secondary benchmarks: 😿 relevant regression found
mean1 max count2
Regressions 😿
(primary)
2.4% 2.5% 2
Regressions 😿
(secondary)
2.3% 2.3% 1
Improvements 🎉
(primary)
N/A N/A 0
Improvements 🎉
(secondary)
N/A N/A 0
All 😿🎉 (primary) 2.4% 2.5% 2

Cycles

Results
  • Primary benchmarks: 🎉 relevant improvement found
  • Secondary benchmarks: no relevant changes found
mean1 max count2
Regressions 😿
(primary)
N/A N/A 0
Regressions 😿
(secondary)
N/A N/A 0
Improvements 🎉
(primary)
-2.0% -2.0% 1
Improvements 🎉
(secondary)
N/A N/A 0
All 😿🎉 (primary) -2.0% -2.0% 1

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Footnotes

  1. the arithmetic mean of the percent change 2

  2. number of relevant changes 2

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants