Rollup of 4 pull requests #95393
Merged
Rollup of 4 pull requests #95393
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
This is my first PR; be gentle! In https://users.rust-lang.org/t/why-does-vec-from-raw-parts-require-same-size-and-not-same-size-capacity/73036/2?u=janpaul123 it was suggested to me that I should make a PR to make the documentation of `Vec::from_raw_parts` less strict, since we don't require `T` to have the same size, just `size_of::<T>() * capacity` to be the same, since that is what results in `Layout::size` being the same in `dealloc`, which is really what matters. Also in https://users.rust-lang.org/t/why-does-vec-from-raw-parts-require-same-size-and-not-same-size-capacity/73036/8?u=janpaul123 it was suggested that it's better to use `slice::from_raw_parts`, which I think is useful advise that could also be mentioned in the docs, so I added that too. Let me know what you think! :)
Clarify that ManuallyDrop<T> has same layout as T This PR implements the documentation change under discussion in rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines#302. It should not be approved or merged until the discussion there is resolved.
…s-with-different-allocators, r=dtolnay Allow comparing `Vec`s with different allocators using `==` See https://stackoverflow.com/q/71021633/7884305. I did not changed the `PartialOrd` impl too because it was not generic already (didn't support `Vec<T> <=> Vec<U> where T: PartialOrd<U>`). Does it needs tests? I don't think this will hurt type inference much because the default allocator is usually not inferred (`new()` specifies it directly, and even with other allocators, you pass the allocator to `new_in()` so the compiler usually knows the type). I think this requires FCP since the impls are already stable.
Docs: make Vec::from_raw_parts documentation less strict This is my first PR; be gentle! In https://users.rust-lang.org/t/why-does-vec-from-raw-parts-require-same-size-and-not-same-size-capacity/73036/2?u=janpaul123 it was suggested to me that I should make a PR to make the documentation of `Vec::from_raw_parts` less strict, since we don't require `T` to have the same size, just `size_of::<T>() * capacity` to be the same, since that is what results in `Layout::size` being the same in `dealloc`, which is really what matters. Also in https://users.rust-lang.org/t/why-does-vec-from-raw-parts-require-same-size-and-not-same-size-capacity/73036/8?u=janpaul123 it was suggested that it's better to use `slice::from_raw_parts`, which I think is useful advise that could also be mentioned in the docs, so I added that too. Let me know what you think! :)
…olnay
impl From<&[T; N]> and From<&mut [T; N]> for Vec<T>
I really wanted to write:
```rust
fn example(a: impl Into<Vec<u8>>) {}
fn main() {
example(b"raw");
}
```
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
|
📌 Commit 8bfc03f has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (93313d1): comparison url. Summary: This benchmark run did not return any relevant results. 6 results were found to be statistically significant but too small to be relevant. If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. @rustbot label: -perf-regression |
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.
Successful merges:
Vecs with different allocators using==#93755 (Allow comparingVecs with different allocators using==)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup