Skip to content

remove unnecessary generic bounds from Vec::append #108467

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

PonasKovas
Copy link
Contributor

Currently Vec::append requires that the other Vec use the same allocator, which is not actually required for the implementation of the method. This PR makes Vec::append accept any Vec<T, B> where B: Allocator.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Feb 25, 2023

r? @thomcc

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Feb 25, 2023
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Feb 25, 2023

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with @rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs to tag it appropriately. If this PR contains changes to any unstable APIs please edit the PR description to add a link to the relevant API Change Proposal or create one if you haven't already. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

  • Stabilizing library features
  • Introducing insta-stable changes such as new implementations of existing stable traits on existing stable types
  • Introducing new or changing existing unstable library APIs (excluding permanently unstable features / features without a tracking issue)
  • Changing public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees
  • Changing observable runtime behavior of library APIs

@thomcc
Copy link
Member

thomcc commented Feb 25, 2023

This seems fine, but I'm going to reassign to someone on the libs-api team.

r? @Amanieu

@rustbot rustbot assigned Amanieu and unassigned thomcc Feb 25, 2023
@kadiwa4
Copy link
Contributor

kadiwa4 commented Feb 26, 2023

The disadvantage is that it prevents #56763 from being implemented (unless you can still do it with specialization)

@Amanieu
Copy link
Member

Amanieu commented Mar 3, 2023

The disadvantage is that it prevents #56763 from being implemented (unless you can still do it with specialization)

That's a good point. Since I don't think there is a strong use case for making append accept a Vec<T, B>, perhaps we should avoid doing this.

@PonasKovas PonasKovas closed this Mar 3, 2023
@thomcc
Copy link
Member

thomcc commented Mar 3, 2023

FWIW we could do it without specialization by comparing typeids. That said I don't feel very strongly about this.

Edit: Nevermind, that doesn't work because A might not be 'static.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants