Skip to content

/rust

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

Tracking issue for non-panicking pow #48320

Closed
milesand opened this Issue Feb 18, 2018 · 8 comments

Comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
C-tracking-issue T-libs disposition-merge finished-final-comment-period
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
6 participants
@milesand @Restioson @alexcrichton @rfcbot @frewsxcv @pietroalbini
@milesand
Copy link
Contributor

milesand commented Feb 18, 2018 •
edited

Relevant PR: #48321

@frewsxcv frewsxcv added the C-tracking-issue label Feb 18, 2018

@frewsxcv frewsxcv referenced this issue Feb 18, 2018

Closed

Add non-panicking variants of pow for Integers #48291

@milesand milesand referenced this issue Feb 19, 2018

Merged

Add non-panicking variants of pow for integer types #48321

@pietroalbini pietroalbini added the T-libs label Feb 20, 2018

kennytm added a commit to kennytm/rust that referenced this issue Feb 27, 2018

@kennytm
Rollup merge of rust-lang#48321 - milesand:no_panic_pow, r=alexcrichton 
Add non-panicking variants of pow for integer types

Currently, calling pow may panic in case of overflow, and the function does not have non-panicking counterparts. Thus, it would be beneficial to add those in.

Closes rust-lang#48291.
Relevant tracking issue: rust-lang#48320
Verified
This commit was created on GitHub.com and signed with a verified signature using GitHub’s key.
GPG key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23 Learn about signing commits
a6820ce

kennytm added a commit to kennytm/rust that referenced this issue Feb 28, 2018

@kennytm
Rollup merge of rust-lang#48321 - milesand:no_panic_pow, r=alexcrichton 
Add non-panicking variants of pow for integer types

Currently, calling pow may panic in case of overflow, and the function does not have non-panicking counterparts. Thus, it would be beneficial to add those in.

Closes rust-lang#48291.
Relevant tracking issue: rust-lang#48320
Verified
This commit was created on GitHub.com and signed with a verified signature using GitHub’s key.
GPG key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23 Learn about signing commits
85d7d0b
@Restioson

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link

Restioson commented Aug 7, 2018

Can this be closed?
@milesand

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Contributor Author

milesand commented Sep 16, 2018

I'm sorry, it's been a while.

While this feature hasn't received much feedback by itself, but with already-stable similar functionalities present, I think this feature can be stabilized as-is.

I'm not familiar with the stabilization process though. What should I do here?
@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link

ghost commented Dec 21, 2018

@milesand any idea when this will be stabilized? Is it going to be stabilized?
@milesand

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Contributor Author

milesand commented Dec 22, 2018 •
edited

@alexcrichton Can we stabilize thie feature?
@alexcrichton

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link
Member

alexcrichton commented Jan 2, 2019

@rfcbot fcp merge

Seems reasonable to me! The APIs being stabilized here (as I understand it) are:

i8::checked_pow(self, u32) -> Option<i8>
i8::saturating_pow(self, u32) -> i8
i8::wrapping_pow(self, u32) -> i8
i8::overflowing_pow(self, u32) -> (i8, bool)

(and similar for all other integral types)
@rfcbot

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link

rfcbot commented Jan 2, 2019 •
edited by sfackler

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

No concerns currently listed.

Once a majority of reviewers approve (and none object), 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 disposition-merge final-comment-period labels Jan 2, 2019

@rfcbot

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link

rfcbot commented Jan 2, 2019

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

@rfcbot rfcbot removed the proposed-final-comment-period label Jan 2, 2019

@rfcbot

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
Copy link

rfcbot commented Jan 12, 2019

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

@rfcbot rfcbot added finished-final-comment-period and removed final-comment-period labels Jan 12, 2019

@milesand milesand referenced this issue Jan 24, 2019

Merged

Stabilize no_panic_pow #57873

Centril added a commit to Centril/rust that referenced this issue Jan 24, 2019

@Centril
Rollup merge of rust-lang#57873 - milesand:master, r=Centril 
Stabilize no_panic_pow

This would close rust-lang#48320.

I'm not sure if I've done this right, I've just changed attribute name to stable and set `since` to two minor versions above current stable since that seemed like what others were doing.
Verified
This commit was created on GitHub.com and signed with a verified signature using GitHub’s key.
GPG key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23 Learn about signing commits
84dd79b

@bors bors closed this in 5fa1016 Jan 25, 2019

@kantai kantai referenced this issue Feb 4, 2019

Merged

Code Review: Smart contract VM 01/30/19 #908

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.