feat: implement {Div,Rem}Assign<NonZero<X>> on X

[JarvisCraft]

Description

This PR implements DivAssign<X> and RemAssign<X> on X as suggested in rust-lang/libs-team#346.

Since this is just a trait implementation on an already stable type, for which non-assign operator traits are already stable, I suggest that it is an insta-stable feature.

[rustbot]

r? @workingjubilee

rustbot has assigned @workingjubilee.
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

[joshtriplett]

Since these are insta-stable, the ACP alone doesn't suffice, so starting an FCP:

@rfcbot merge

[rfcbot]

Team member @m-ou-se has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members:

• @Amanieu
• @BurntSushi
• @dtolnay
• @joshtriplett
• @m-ou-se

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.

[rfcbot]

🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔

[bors]

✌️ @JarvisCraft, you can now approve this pull request!

If @workingjubilee told you to "r=me" after making some further change, please make that change, then do @bors r=@workingjubilee

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #121885) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[JarvisCraft]

Thanks for your hint, I've updated the PR by echoing the comments and rebasing on master.

@bors r=@workingjubilee

[bors]

📌 Commit e7d3970 has been approved by workingjubilee

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit e7d3970 with merge a83caa2...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[rust-log-analyzer]

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

[workingjubilee]

Seems spurious?

@bors retry

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit e7d3970 with merge 80e5694...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: workingjubilee
Pushing 80e5694 to master...

[rust-log-analyzer]

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

##[endgroup]
Starting download for Cargo-lock
Directory structure has been setup for the artifact
Total number of files that will be downloaded: 1
Artifact Cargo-lock was downloaded to /home/runner/work/rust/rust
##[group]Run actions/download-artifact@v3
with:
  name: cargo-updates
---
##[endgroup]
Starting download for cargo-updates
Directory structure has been setup for the artifact
Total number of files that will be downloaded: 1
Skipping download validation.
Artifact cargo-updates was downloaded to /home/runner/work/rust/rust
##[group]Run echo "${COMMIT_MESSAGE}" > commit.txt
echo "${COMMIT_MESSAGE}" > commit.txt
echo "${COMMIT_MESSAGE}" > commit.txt
cat cargo_update.log >> commit.txt

echo "${PR_MESSAGE}" > body.md
echo '```txt' >> body.md
cat cargo_update.log >> body.md
echo '```' >> body.md
shell: /usr/bin/bash --noprofile --norc -e -o pipefail {0}
env:
  RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP: 1
  PR_TITLE: Weekly `cargo update`
  PR_MESSAGE: Automation to keep dependencies in `Cargo.lock` current.
following is the output from `cargo update`:
  COMMIT_MESSAGE: cargo update 
##[endgroup]
##[group]Run git config user.name github-actions
git config user.name github-actions
git config user.email [email protected]
git switch --force-create cargo_update
git add ./Cargo.lock
git commit --no-verify --file=commit.txt
---
##[endgroup]
Switched to a new branch 'cargo_update'
On branch cargo_update
Untracked files:
  (use "git add <file>..." to include in what will be committed)
 body.md
 commit.txt


nothing added to commit but untracked files present (use "git add" to track)
##[error]Process completed with exit code 1.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (80e5694): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.3%	[2.2%, 2.4%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.4%	[-3.4%, -3.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.4%	[-3.3%, -0.6%]	6
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-3.4%, 2.4%]	3

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-5.8%	[-11.4%, -1.4%]	7
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 668.349s -> 668.534s (0.03%)
Artifact size: 312.73 MiB -> 312.79 MiB (0.02%)