This increases regionck performance greatly - type-checking on
librustc decreased from 9.1s to 8.1s. Because of Amdahl's law,
total performance is improved only by about 1.5% (LLVM wizards,
this is your opportunity to shine!).
before:
576.91user 4.26system 7:42.36elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 1142192maxresident)k
after:
566.50user 4.84system 7:36.84elapsed 125%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 1124304maxresident)k
I am somewhat worried really need to find out why we have this Red Queen's
Race going on here. Originally I suspected it may be a problem from RFC1214's
warnings, but it seems to be an effect from other changes.
However, the increase seems to be mostly in LLVM's time, so I guess
it's the LLVM wizards' problem.
This first patch starts by moving around pieces of state related to
type checking. The goal is to slowly unify the type checking state
into a single typing context. This initial patch moves the
ParameterEnvironment into the InferCtxt and moves shared tables
from Inherited and ty::ctxt into their own struct Tables. This
is the foundational work to refactoring the type checker to
enable future evolution of the language and tooling.
fmt::Show is for debugging, and can and should be implemented for
all public types. This trait is used with `{:?}` syntax. There still
exists #[derive(Show)].
fmt::String is for types that faithfully be represented as a String.
Because of this, there is no way to derive fmt::String, all
implementations must be purposeful. It is used by the default format
syntax, `{}`.
This will break most instances of `{}`, since that now requires the type
to impl fmt::String. In most cases, replacing `{}` with `{:?}` is the
correct fix. Types that were being printed specifically for users should
receive a fmt::String implementation to fix this.
Part of #20013
[breaking-change]
This implements RFC 179 by making the pattern `&<pat>` require matching
against a variable of type `&T`, and introducing the pattern `&mut
<pat>` which only works with variables of type `&mut T`.
The pattern `&mut x` currently parses as `&(mut x)` i.e. a pattern match
through a `&T` or a `&mut T` that binds the variable `x` to have type
`T` and to be mutable. This should be rewritten as follows, for example,
for &mut x in slice.iter() {
becomes
for &x in slice.iter() {
let mut x = x;
Due to this, this is a
[breaking-change]
Closes#20496.
Use autoderef for call notation. This is consistent in that we now autoderef all postfix operators (`.`, `[]`, and `()`). It also means you can call closures without writing `(*f)()`. Note that this is rebased atop the rollup, so only the final commit is relevant.
r? @pcwalton
[breaking-change]
The `mut` in slices is now redundant. Mutability is 'inferred' from position. This means that if mutability is only obvious from the type, you will need to use explicit calls to the slicing methods.
This change makes the compiler no longer infer whether types (structures
and enumerations) implement the `Copy` trait (and thus are implicitly
copyable). Rather, you must implement `Copy` yourself via `impl Copy for
MyType {}`.
A new warning has been added, `missing_copy_implementations`, to warn
you if a non-generic public type has been added that could have
implemented `Copy` but didn't.
For convenience, you may *temporarily* opt out of this behavior by using
`#![feature(opt_out_copy)]`. Note though that this feature gate will never be
accepted and will be removed by the time that 1.0 is released, so you should
transition your code away from using it.
This breaks code like:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
Change this code to:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
impl Copy for Point2D {}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
This is the backwards-incompatible part of #13231.
Part of RFC #3.
[breaking-change]
(Previously, scopes were solely identified with NodeId's; this
refactoring prepares for a future where that does not hold.)
Ground work for a proper fix to #8861.
(Previously, statically identifiable scopes/regions were solely
identified with NodeId's; this refactoring prepares for a future
where that 1:1 correspondence does not hold.)
