stabilize smart pointer map functions - #160534
Conversation
|
r? @Darksonn rustbot has assigned @Darksonn. Use Why was this reviewer chosen?The reviewer was selected based on:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
a55c402 to
8279572
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Sorry I'm at capacity for the next two weeks. @rustbot reroll |
|
This stabilizes a subset of #144419 — just the
@rfcbot fcp merge libs-api |
|
@dtolnay has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members: No concerns currently listed. Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me. |
|
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
|
Is there a reason custom allocators were not included in the implementation? |
|
...huh. It might honestly just be an oversight? I think it should be sound. cc @Amanieu @BurntSushi @dtolnay @joshtriplett @the8472 (can't ping the old libs-api anymore) as ppl with checkboxes here - should we block this on adding an allocator param? |
|
Allocators are not stable API anyway. The implementation looks simple enough that it should be possible to just jam it in, except that the If you want I can just write a PR right now |
|
Wouldn't it be breaking to move this later from an |
8279572 to
894188d
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
894188d to
f178ee0
Compare
|
This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed. Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers. |
f178ee0 to
3ecb376
Compare
|
@rustbot ready |
|
I think you removed the stabilization changes on |
|
Sorry about that; I'm having a moment with rebases apparently |
|
Sorry for hitting you with a merge conflict during an fcp :D |
3ecb376 to
82ee18a
Compare
|
All good, should be better now |
|
@bors r+ |
…ap, r=nia-e stabilize smart pointer map functions Tracking issue: rust-lang#144419 @rustbot modify labels: +T-libs-api
…ap, r=nia-e stabilize smart pointer map functions Tracking issue: rust-lang#144419 @rustbot modify labels: +T-libs-api
…ap, r=nia-e stabilize smart pointer map functions Tracking issue: rust-lang#144419 @rustbot modify labels: +T-libs-api
…uwer Rollup of 12 pull requests Successful merges: - #162045 (`rust-analyzer` subtree update) - #162077 (compiler-builtins subtree update) - #137720 (support `#[target_feature(enable = ...)]` on `#[naked]` functions) - #160534 (stabilize smart pointer map functions) - #160551 (mir_build: Clearly distinguish or/refutable/irrefutable patterns during match lowering) - #161929 (explicitly track inherent const generic args kind) - #162063 (Switch dist-aarch64-linux to EC2 and update dist-x86_64-linux) - #161937 (A series of Polonius Alpha refactors) - #162014 (Move more `rustdoc-html` tests using `--test` into the right folder) - #162051 (`rustc_feature` cleanups) - #162055 (remove `_{style}` recovery for diagnostic structs) - #162075 (Move track_caller on closures gating to attribute parsing)
…ap, r=nia-e stabilize smart pointer map functions Tracking issue: rust-lang#144419 @rustbot modify labels: +T-libs-api
…ap, r=nia-e stabilize smart pointer map functions Tracking issue: rust-lang#144419 @rustbot modify labels: +T-libs-api
View all comments
Tracking issue: #144419
@rustbot modify labels: +T-libs-api