Clarify [T]::select_nth_unstable* return values#98111
Merged
bors merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom Sep 25, 2022
Merged
Conversation
In cases where the nth element is not unique within the slice, it is not correct to say that the values in the returned triplet include ones for "all elements" less/greater than that at the given index: indeed one (or more) such values would then laso contain values equal to that at the given index. The text proposed here clarifies exactly what is returned, but in so doing it is also documenting an implementation detail that previously wasn't detailed: namely that the return slices are slices into the reordered slice. I don't think this can be contentious, because the lifetimes of those returned slices are bound to that of the original (now reordered) slice—so there really isn't any other reasonable implementation that could have this behaviour; but nevertheless it's probably best if @rust-lang/libs-api give it a nod? Fixes rust-lang#97982 r? m-ou-se @rustbot label +A-docs C-bug +T-libs-api
Contributor
|
Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams! If this PR contains changes to any Examples of
|
Contributor
|
r? @thomcc (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
GuillaumeGomez
approved these changes
Sep 25, 2022
Member
|
Thanks! @bors r+ rollup |
Collaborator
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 25, 2022
…fee1-dead Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#98111 (Clarify `[T]::select_nth_unstable*` return values) - rust-lang#101431 (Look at move place's type when suggesting mutable reborrow) - rust-lang#101800 (Constify slice.split_at_mut(_unchecked)) - rust-lang#101997 (Remove support for legacy PM) - rust-lang#102194 (Note the type when unable to drop values in compile time) - rust-lang#102200 (Constify Default impl's for Arrays and Tuples.) - rust-lang#102245 (Constify cmp_min_max_by.) - rust-lang#102259 (Type-annotate and simplify documentation of Option::unwrap_or_default) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
8 participants
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.
In cases where the nth element is not unique within the slice, it is not
correct to say that the values in the returned triplet include ones for
"all elements" less/greater than that at the given index: indeed one (or
more) such values would then also contain elements equal to that at
the given index.
The text proposed here clarifies exactly what is returned, but in so
doing it is also documenting an implementation detail that previously
wasn't detailed: namely that the returned slices are slices into the
reordered slice. I don't think this can be contentious, because the
lifetimes of those returned slices are bound to that of the original
(now reordered) slice—so there really isn't any other reasonable
implementation that could have this behaviour; but nevertheless it's
probably best if @rust-lang/libs-api give it a nod?
Fixes #97982
r? @m-ou-se
@rustbot label +A-docs +C-bug +T-libs-api -T-libs