Skip to content

Replace old pow_with_uint with the new pow func #11649

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 20, 2014
Merged

Conversation

flaper87
Copy link
Contributor

There was an old and barely used implementation of pow, which expected
both parameters to be uint and required more traits to be implemented.
Since a new implementation for pow landed, I'm proposing to remove
this old impl in favor of the new one.

The benchmark shows that the new implementation is faster than the one being removed:

    test num::bench::bench_pow_function               ..bench:      9429 ns/iter (+/- 2055)
    test num::bench::bench_pow_with_uint_function     ...bench:     28476 ns/iter (+/- 2202)

There was an old and barely used implementation of pow, which expected
both parameters to be uint and required more traits to be implemented.
Since a new implementation for `pow` landed, I'm proposing to remove
this old impl in favor of the new one.

The benchmark shows that the new implementation is faster than the one
being removed:

test num::bench::bench_pow_function               ..bench:      9429 ns/iter (+/- 2055)
test num::bench::bench_pow_with_uint_function     ...bench:     28476 ns/iter (+/- 2202)
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 20, 2014
There was an old and barely used implementation of pow, which expected
both parameters to be uint and required more traits to be implemented.
Since a new implementation for `pow` landed, I'm proposing to remove
this old impl in favor of the new one.

The benchmark shows that the new implementation is faster than the one being removed:

```
    test num::bench::bench_pow_function               ..bench:      9429 ns/iter (+/- 2055)
    test num::bench::bench_pow_with_uint_function     ...bench:     28476 ns/iter (+/- 2202)
```
@bors bors closed this Jan 20, 2014
@bors bors merged commit 3830a3b into rust-lang:master Jan 20, 2014
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 25, 2022
…ion-in-vscode-settings, r=Veykril

feat: Support variable substitution in VSCode settings

Currently support a subset of [variables provided by VSCode](https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/editor/variables-reference) in `server.extraEnv` section of Rust-Analyzer settings:

  * `workspaceFolder`
  * `workspaceFolderBasename`
  * `cwd`
  * `execPath`
  * `pathSeparator`

Also, this PR adds support for general environment variables resolution. You can declare environment variables and reference them from other variables like this:

```JSON
"rust-analyzer.server.extraEnv": {
    "RUSTFLAGS": "-L${env:OPEN_XR_SDK_PATH}",
    "OPEN_XR_SDK_PATH": "${workspaceFolder}\\..\\OpenXR-SDK\\build\\src\\loader\\Release"
},
```
The order of variable declaration doesn't matter, you can reference variables before defining them. If the variable is not present in `extraEnv` section, VSCode will search for them in your environment. Missing variables will be replaced with empty string. Circular references won't be resolved and will be passed to rust-analyzer server process as is.

Closes rust-lang#9626, but doesn't address use cases where people want to use values provided by `rustc` or `cargo`, such as `${targetTriple}` proposal rust-lang#11649
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants