-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.4k
Add "# Safety" and "# Examples" section in std::mem::uninitialized
#151033
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
CieriA
wants to merge
6
commits into
rust-lang:main
Choose a base branch
from
CieriA:patch-6
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+33
−18
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
45d065c
library: Add Safety and Examples section in std::mem::uninitialized
CieriA 2c7cad5
library: Add another example in `uninitialized` safety conditions
CieriA de12e31
library: use allow(deprecated) for uninitialized doctests
CieriA c7b6315
Reword safety of uninitialized for #151033 (comment)
CieriA 47a2785
fix failed job
CieriA 0a9127d
Merge branch 'main' into patch-6
CieriA File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should hint that non-ZST
Teffectively needs to be allMaybeUninitto account for the uninitialized requirement. Not sure about best wording but maybe something like:"... That is, if
Tis not a ZST, it must beMaybeUninitor an ADT containing onlyMaybeUninitand padding."Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree, but wouldn't that suggest a correct usage of this function? I removed that part because it would suggest that using
uninitialized()with ZSTs is acceptable (and you said that we should discourage usage ofuninitialized()by not providing any example, that's why I kept the safety conditions a bit more "abstract"). What do you think?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think mentioning the
MaybeUninitrequirement suggests anything more than what is already there, just makes it more obvious that this isn't sound even for POD types (since that's been a confusion point in the past). Not mentioning ZSTs seems reasonable though.