Less unsafe in the array example of MaybeUninit docs #62634
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
Ah, good point! I like it. The comment before the loop already says "dropping a |
llogiq
force-pushed
the
uninit-array-docs
branch
2 times, most recently
from
70524b8
to
55e3223
Compare
|
Oops, I missed the |
|
Thanks! @bors r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 55e322355b5c5982ef9fee2e7e828ad6a30b7d84 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
|
Uh, branch CI failed. Could you investigate? @bors r- |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
Stargateur
suggested changes
Jul 14, 2019
llogiq
force-pushed
the
uninit-array-docs
branch
from
55e3223
to
cb3aa4c
Compare
|
Okay, r=me once CI for this PR is green. @bors delegate+ |
|
✌️ @llogiq can now approve this pull request |
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit cb3aa4c has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
Please make sure to designate the reviewer when you are doing this for someone else. @bors r=RalfJung |
|
💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.
|
|
📌 Commit cb3aa4c has been approved by |
Mark-Simulacrum
added a commit
to Mark-Simulacrum/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 15, 2019
Less unsafe in the array example of MaybeUninit docs I believe this is an acceptable way to initialize elements of `[MaybeUninit<T>; _]` arrays. Miri agrees. Conceptually, we are working at the array level, above the `MaybeUninit`, and as we are replacing it wholesale, this should pose no problem to soundness. And the code is easier to read. r? @RalfJung
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 16, 2019
Rollup of 14 pull requests Successful merges: - #62103 (Add debug assertions to write_bytes and copy*) - #62405 (Remove never_type feature requirement for exhaustive patterns) - #62491 (Fix Pin urls in Option documentation) - #62533 (Add missing links for CannotReallocInPlace type) - #62634 (Less unsafe in the array example of MaybeUninit docs) - #62639 (Make VaListImpl<'f> invariant over the 'f lifetime) - #62646 (Tweak wording in feature gate errors) - #62662 (add spaces in front of trait requirements in libcore/cell.rs) - #62668 (Fix #62660) - #62673 (miri validation: better error messages for dangling references) - #62680 (Actually call `visit_block_entry` in `DataflowResultsConsumer`) - #62685 (Add info about undefined behavior to as_ref suggestions) - #62689 (Fix typo in RawWaker::new documentation) - #62698 (SGX target: don't pretend to be GNU/Linux to LLVM) Failed merges: r? @ghost
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in 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.
I believe this is an acceptable way to initialize elements of
[MaybeUninit<T>; _]arrays. Miri agrees. Conceptually, we are working at the array level, above theMaybeUninit, and as we are replacing it wholesale, this should pose no problem to soundness. And the code is easier to read.r? @RalfJung