Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Add c_size_t and c_ssize_t to std::os::raw. - #88340
Conversation
rust-highfive
commented
Aug 25, 2021
(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
joshtriplett
commented
Aug 25, 2021
Looks good to me. r=me once you file the tracking issue and change the PR to use that issue number. |
joshtriplett
commented
Aug 26, 2021
@bors r+ |
bors
commented
Aug 26, 2021
📌 Commit 5b25de5 has been approved by |
joshtriplett
commented
Aug 26, 2021
@bors r- Just saw the names attached to the emoji on the top post. @petrochenkov@jhpratt Can you elaborate? |
jhpratt
commented
Aug 26, 2021
I have no problem with the PR itself, I just don't think the API is necessary. If you disagree, merge it — it's not like it's insta-stable or anything. |
jhpratt
commented
Aug 26, 2021
Actually, never mind. I didn't realize until just now that the |
joshtriplett
commented
Aug 26, 2021
@bors r+ |
bors
commented
Aug 26, 2021
📌 Commit 5b25de5 has been approved by |
Add `c_size_t` and `c_ssize_t` to `std::os::raw`. Apparently these aren't guaranteed to be the same, and are merely "always the same in practice" (see https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-lang.2Fwg-unsafe-code-guidelines/topic/.60usize.60.20vs.20.60size_t.60). This is a big footgun, but I suspect it can be alleviated if we expose this and start migrating people to it in advance of any platforms that ever have this as different. I'll file a tracking issue after this gets some traction.
Add `c_size_t` and `c_ssize_t` to `std::os::raw`. Apparently these aren't guaranteed to be the same, and are merely "always the same in practice" (see https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-lang.2Fwg-unsafe-code-guidelines/topic/.60usize.60.20vs.20.60size_t.60). This is a big footgun, but I suspect it can be alleviated if we expose this and start migrating people to it in advance of any platforms that ever have this as different. I'll file a tracking issue after this gets some traction.
…arth Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#87832 (Fix debugger stepping behavior with `match` expressions) - rust-lang#88123 (Make spans for tuple patterns in E0023 more precise) - rust-lang#88215 (Reland rust-lang#83738: "rustdoc: Don't load all extern crates unconditionally") - rust-lang#88216 (Don't stabilize creation of TryReserveError instances) - rust-lang#88270 (Handle type ascription type ops in NLL HRTB diagnostics) - rust-lang#88289 (Fixes for LLVM change 0f45c16) - rust-lang#88320 (type_implements_trait consider obligation failure on overflow) - rust-lang#88332 (Add argument types tait tests) - rust-lang#88340 (Add `c_size_t` and `c_ssize_t` to `std::os::raw`.) - rust-lang#88346 (Revert "Add type of a let tait test impl trait straight in let") - rust-lang#88348 (Add field types tait tests) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Apparently these aren't guaranteed to be the same, and are merely "always the same in practice" (see https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-lang.2Fwg-unsafe-code-guidelines/topic/.60usize.60.20vs.20.60size_t.60).
This is a big footgun, but I suspect it can be alleviated if we expose this and start migrating people to it in advance of any platforms that ever have this as different.
I'll file a tracking issue after this gets some traction.