Doc: explicits the .rodata section in std::str

[gamazeps]

Made the fact that rodata is a section of the executable more explicit
Closes #18449

[thestinger]

The issue was filed about rodata being an unfamiliar term. It's also an implementation detail which is not portable across platforms. I think it needs to be removed entirely and replaced with documentation explaining that string constants are immutable views with a 'static lifetime (&'static str).

[gamazeps]

Ok, I see what you meant :)

What I tried to do was just trying to make it easier to look for on the internet by making it more explicit.
By the way is it really an implementation detail ? Because in C, having strings is .rodata is the norm (at least with gcc), or at least that's what I have always seen (wether in -Os, -O0 or -O3)

[richo]

That's true in ELF, on x86, but iirc mips doesn't actually have a rodata segment.

[gamazeps]

ELF is the norm in mips too (bare-metal C on mips is my day job :p )

[thestinger]

Rust isn't artificially limited to platforms with an rodata section and memory protection concepts. It makes no guarantees about low-level code generation implementation details like this. Documenting that string literals are immutable views with static lifetimes doesn't require getting bogged down in implementation details. It's not helpful for the documentation to mention irrelevant low-level details rather than communicating the semantics and performance characteristics.

[gamazeps]

No worries, your explanation is clearer, I'll use it in a few minutes (I'm on another issue for now ;) )

[thestinger]

(for example, there's no rodata section on Windows - it's named differently)

[gamazeps]

@thestinger taken into acount, and now ?