Skip to content
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

Stabilize slice::repeat (feature repeat_generic_slice) #64877

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 11, 2019

Conversation

tesuji
Copy link
Contributor

@tesuji tesuji commented Sep 28, 2019

Closes #48784
r? @SimonSapin

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 28, 2019
@jonas-schievink jonas-schievink added the relnotes Marks issues that should be documented in the release notes of the next release. label Sep 28, 2019
@jonas-schievink jonas-schievink added this to the 1.40 milestone Sep 28, 2019
@jonas-schievink jonas-schievink added the T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Sep 28, 2019
@tesuji

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Sep 28, 2019

Error: Label needs-fcp can only be set by Rust team members

Please let @rust-lang/release know if you're having trouble with this bot.

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

Signature:

impl<T> [T] {
    pub fn repeat(&self, n: usize) -> Vec<T> where T: Copy {}
}

Would we want to add a variation of this with Clone instead of Copy? If so what would the naming scheme be?

@rfcbot fcp merge

@rfcbot
Copy link

rfcbot commented Sep 28, 2019

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

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 rfcbot added proposed-final-comment-period Proposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off. disposition-merge This issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it. labels Sep 28, 2019
@sfackler
Copy link
Member

I think we'd just have a single method with internal specialization for T: Copy.

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

In that case the signature to stabilize is not this one.

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

SimonSapin commented Sep 28, 2019

Oh never mind, I forgot that Clone: Copy Copy: Clone so it should be fine to extend this later.

@rfcbot rfcbot added the final-comment-period In the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised. label Sep 30, 2019
@rfcbot
Copy link

rfcbot commented Sep 30, 2019

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

@rfcbot rfcbot removed the proposed-final-comment-period Proposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off. label Sep 30, 2019
@tesuji tesuji force-pushed the stabilize-repeat_generic_slice branch from 3ebdd91 to 4a2ae45 Compare October 2, 2019 04:48
@yodaldevoid
Copy link
Contributor

@SimonSapin Did you mean to say Copy: Clone?

@rfcbot
Copy link

rfcbot commented Oct 10, 2019

The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete.

As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed.

The RFC will be merged soon.

@rfcbot rfcbot added finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue. and removed final-comment-period In the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised. labels Oct 10, 2019
@tesuji
Copy link
Contributor Author

tesuji commented Oct 11, 2019

I have one question: Can we make it like Python itertools::cycle function?
Which mean this slice::repeat function could return an iterator instead?
Should we rename it to slice::cycle instead?

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

@yodaldevoid Err, yes

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

@lzutao We already have a cycle method on all iterators that implement Clone (which includes slice::Iter), though that one returns an infinite iterator.

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 11, 2019

📌 Commit 4a2ae45 has been approved by SimonSapin

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Oct 11, 2019
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 11, 2019

⌛ Testing commit 4a2ae45 with merge 6767d9b...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2019
…Sapin

Stabilize `slice::repeat` (feature `repeat_generic_slice`)

Closes #48784
r? @SimonSapin
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 11, 2019

☀️ Test successful - checks-azure
Approved by: SimonSapin
Pushing 6767d9b to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Oct 11, 2019
@bors bors merged commit 4a2ae45 into rust-lang:master Oct 11, 2019
@tesuji tesuji deleted the stabilize-repeat_generic_slice branch October 12, 2019 01:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
disposition-merge This issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it. finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue. merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. relnotes Marks issues that should be documented in the release notes of the next release. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

repeat method for (byte) slices?
9 participants