io: soften ‘at most one write attempt’ requirement in io::Write::write
At the moment, documentation of std::io::Write::write indicates that
call to it ‘represents at most one attempt to write to any wrapped
object’. It seems that such wording was put there to contrast it with
pre-1.0 interface which attempted to write all the data (it has since
been changed in [RFC 517]).
However, the requirement puts unnecessary constraints and may
complicate adaptors which perform non-trivial transformations on the
data. For example, they may maintain an internal buffer which needs
to be written out before the write method accepts more data. It might
be natural to code the method such that it flushes the buffer and then
grabs another chunk of user data. With the current wording in the
documentation, the adaptor would be forced to return Ok(0).
This commit softens the wording such that implementations can choose
code structure which makes most sense for their particular use case.
While at it, elaborate on the meaning of `Ok(0)` return pointing out
that the write_all methods interprets it as an error.
[RFC 517]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/0517-io-os-reform.html
Limit read size in `File::read_to_end` loop
Fixes#110650.
Windows file reads have perf overhead that's proportional to the buffer size. When we have a reasonable expectation that we know the file size, we can set a reasonable upper bound for the size of the buffer in one read call.
Guarantee that when `read_buf_exact` returns, all bytes read will be
appended to the buffer. Including the case when the operations fails.
The motivating use case are operations on a non-blocking reader. When
`read_buf_exact` fails with `ErrorKind::WouldBlock` error, the operation
can be resumed at a later time.
At the moment, documentation of std::io::Write::write indicates that
call to it ‘represents at most one attempt to write to any wrapped
object’. It seems that such wording was put there to contrast it
with pre-1.0 interface which attempted to write all the data (it has
since been changed in [RFC 517]).
However, the requirement puts unnecessary constraints and may complicate
adaptors which perform non-trivial transformations on the data. For
example, they may maintain an internal buffer which needs to be written
out before the write method accepts more data. It might be natural to
code the method such that it flushes the buffer and then grabs another
chunk of user data. With the current wording in the documentation, the
adaptor would be forced to return Ok(0).
This commit softens the wording such that implementations can choose
code structure which makes most sense for their particular use case.
While at it, elaborate on the meaning of `Ok(0)` return pointing out
that the write_all methods interprets it as an error.
[RFC 517]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/0517-io-os-reform.html
The UNIX and WASI implementations use `isatty`. The Windows
implementation uses the same logic the `atty` crate uses, including the
hack needed to detect msys terminals.
Implement this trait for `File` and for `Stdin`/`Stdout`/`Stderr` and
their locked counterparts on all platforms. On UNIX and WASI, implement
it for `BorrowedFd`/`OwnedFd`. On Windows, implement it for
`BorrowedHandle`/`OwnedHandle`.
Based on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/91121
Co-authored-by: Matt Wilkinson <mattwilki17@gmail.com>
Add mention of `BufReader` in `Read::bytes` docs
There is a general paragraph about `BufRead` in the `Read` trait's docs, however using `bytes` without `BufRead` *always* has a large impact, due to reads of size 1.
`@rustbot` label +A-docs
