implement Iterator::{exactly_one, collect_array}
#149270
Conversation
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
rustbot has assigned @Mark-Simulacrum. Use |
|
Implementing |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
jdonszelmann
force-pushed
the
exact-length-collection
branch
from
050e278 to
1e50c8a
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
jdonszelmann
force-pushed
the
exact-length-collection
branch
from
1e50c8a to
6b0bbcc
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
jdonszelmann
force-pushed
the
exact-length-collection
branch
from
6b0bbcc to
710c1d4
Compare
|
As you can see from the 2nd commit and the CI failures, since exactly_one conflicts with itertools we get some FCWs. How do we usually deal with those? I doubt this is the first iterator method that also already existed in itertools. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
jdonszelmann
force-pushed
the
exact-length-collection
branch
from
710c1d4 to
5e40f3f
Compare
|
Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy cc @rust-lang/clippy rust-analyzer is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/rust-analyzer instead. cc @rust-lang/rust-analyzer |
rustbot
added
T-clippy
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
jdonszelmann
force-pushed
the
exact-length-collection
branch
from
5e40f3f to
d65444f
Compare
jdonszelmann
force-pushed
the
exact-length-collection
branch
from
d65444f to
f201752
Compare
This should be resolved by supertrait item shadowing, which already has a stabilization PR 🎉. This was transitively mentioned in a comment by Amanieu on my older ACP for |
|
yup, already talked to some peeps about it. Thanks! |
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
…on, r=Mark-Simulacrum
implement `Iterator::{exactly_one, collect_array}`
As per rust-lang#149266
…on, r=Mark-Simulacrum
implement `Iterator::{exactly_one, collect_array}`
As per rust-lang#149266
…on, r=Mark-Simulacrum
implement `Iterator::{exactly_one, collect_array}`
As per rust-lang#149266
Rollup of 19 pull requests Successful merges: - #148048 (Stabilize `maybe_uninit_write_slice`) - #148641 (Add a diagnostic attribute for special casing const bound errors for non-const impls) - #148765 (std: split up the `thread` module) - #149074 (Add Command::get_env_clear) - #149097 (num: Implement `uint_gather_scatter_bits` feature for unsigned integers) - #149131 (optimize `slice::Iter::next_chunk`) - #149190 (Forbid `CHECK: br` and `CHECK-NOT: br` in codegen tests (suggest `br {{.*}}` instead)) - #149239 (clarify float min/max behavios for NaNs and signed zeros) - #149243 (Fix typo and clarify bootstrap change tracker entry) - #149270 (implement `Iterator::{exactly_one, collect_array}`) - #149295 (Suggest _bytes versions of endian-converting methods) - #149301 (Motor OS: make decode_error_kind more comprehensive) - #149306 (bootstrap: Miri now handles jemalloc like everything else) - #149325 (rustdoc: add regression test for #140968) - #149332 (fix rustdoc search says “Consider searching for "null" instead.” #149324) - #149349 (Fix typo in comment.) - #149353 (Tidying up UI tests [3/N]) - #149355 (Document that `build.description` affects symbol mangling and crate IDs) - #149360 (Enable CI download for windows-gnullvm) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
…on, r=Mark-Simulacrum
implement `Iterator::{exactly_one, collect_array}`
As per rust-lang#149266
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #149238 (float::clamp: make treatment of signed zeros unspecified) - #149270 (implement `Iterator::{exactly_one, collect_array}`) - #149295 (Suggest _bytes versions of endian-converting methods) - #149332 (fix rustdoc search says “Consider searching for "null" instead.” #149324) - #149349 (Fix typo in comment.) - #149353 (Tidying up UI tests [3/N]) - #149355 (Document that `build.description` affects symbol mangling and crate IDs) - #149360 (Enable CI download for windows-gnullvm) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
In past I've tried to implement a collect_array using next_chunk or similar things from the std lib, and it wasn't efficent, so I had to restore my original custom implementation of collect_array. So before merging this into a nonnightly rustc, it's a good idea to benchmark it well, with arrays large at least 5000 items, or 2D arrays of 100x30 ints, etc, against a "native" version not based on next_chunk. If you really need something to do that benchmark, I can probably extract the code from my libs. |
7 participants
As per #149266