Skip to content

Stabilize slice_as_chunks library feature #139656

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

scottmcm
Copy link
Member

@scottmcm scottmcm commented Apr 11, 2025

Draft as this needs #139163 to land first.

FCP: #74985 (comment)

Methods being stabilized are:

impl [T] {
    const fn as_chunks<const N: usize>(&self) -> (&[[T; N]], &[T]);
    const fn as_rchunks<const N: usize>(&self) -> (&[T], &[[T; N]]);
    const unsafe fn as_chunks_unchecked<const N: usize>(&self) -> &[[T; N]];
    const fn as_chunks_mut<const N: usize>(&mut self) -> (&mut [[T; N]], &mut [T]);
    const fn as_rchunks_mut<const N: usize>(&mut self) -> (&mut [T], &mut [[T; N]]);
    const unsafe fn as_chunks_unchecked_mut<const N: usize>(&mut self) -> &mut [[T; N]];
}

(FCP's not done quite yet, but will in another day if I'm counting right.) FCP Complete: #74985 (comment)

@scottmcm scottmcm added the S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. label Apr 11, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Apr 11, 2025

r? @ibraheemdev

rustbot has assigned @ibraheemdev.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Apr 11, 2025
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@scottmcm scottmcm force-pushed the stabilize-slice-as-chunks branch from 1f3dfae to 6cfdd53 Compare April 11, 2025 04:17
@scottmcm scottmcm closed this Apr 13, 2025
@scottmcm scottmcm reopened this Apr 13, 2025
@scottmcm scottmcm marked this pull request as ready for review April 13, 2025 07:30
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Apr 13, 2025

The Miri subtree was changed

cc @rust-lang/miri

@scottmcm scottmcm removed the S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. label Apr 13, 2025
@scottmcm
Copy link
Member Author

@rust-lang/libs-api I wanted to drop you a ping because there has been a reasonable amount of discussion during the FCP, so if you want me to hold off this for a bit to give you discussion time, let me know.

(I haven't seen any indication from comments that you've changed your minds, but it might just not have made it into the thread.)

@BurntSushi
Copy link
Member

Aye yeah, I'm still good with this. But given the discussion, holding for a second from another libs-api member seems prudent.

@dtolnay
Copy link
Member

dtolnay commented Apr 13, 2025

LGTM as well. Thank you. We have talked about this feature across at least a half dozen library API team meetings and not diverged from favoring this design.

@@ -1314,7 +1314,6 @@ impl<T> [T] {
/// # Examples
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the section above (which I cannot comment because it is too far from the diff) we need to strike "This check will most probably get changed to a compile time error before this method gets stabilized."

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oops, that had even been mentioned in #74985 (comment) and I forgot.

Did a pass over the docs to fix that bit, elaborate on the resulting lengths, and also add a cross-references between these methods and as_flattened(_mut).

@rustbot ready

@dtolnay dtolnay assigned dtolnay and unassigned ibraheemdev Apr 13, 2025
@dtolnay dtolnay added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Apr 13, 2025
Also mention them from `as_flattened(_mut)`.
@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Apr 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants