Release post for Rust 1.17 #162
Conversation
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| your preferences. | ||
|
|
||
| Backtraces [now have nicer formatting](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/38165), eliding | ||
| many internal stack frames by default. For example, the full backtrace: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks like maybe this is worded too aggressively rust-lang/rust#40684
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah yeah we don't do any pruning, but the print out is still intended to be nicer:
before
thread 'main' panicked at 'explicit panic', foo.rs:2
stack backtrace:
1: 0x55c39a23372c - std::sys::imp::backtrace::tracing::imp::write::hf33ae72d0baa11ed
at /buildslave/rust-buildbot/slave/stable-dist-rustc-linux/build/src/libstd/sys/unix/backtrace/tracing/gcc_s.rs:42
2: 0x55c39a23571e - std::panicking::default_hook::{{closure}}::h59672b733cc6a455
at /buildslave/rust-buildbot/slave/stable-dist-rustc-linux/build/src/libstd/panicking.rs:351
3: 0x55c39a235324 - std::panicking::default_hook::h1670459d2f3f8843
at /buildslave/rust-buildbot/slave/stable-dist-rustc-linux/build/src/libstd/panicking.rs:367
4: 0x55c39a235afb - std::panicking::rust_panic_with_hook::hcf0ddb069e7beee7
at /buildslave/rust-buildbot/slave/stable-dist-rustc-linux/build/src/libstd/panicking.rs:555
5: 0x55c39a22e866 - std::panicking::begin_panic::heb433e9aa28a7408
6: 0x55c39a22e9bf - foo::main::hd216d4a160fcce19
7: 0x55c39a23d44a - __rust_maybe_catch_panic
at /buildslave/rust-buildbot/slave/stable-dist-rustc-linux/build/src/libpanic_unwind/lib.rs:98
8: 0x55c39a236006 - std::rt::lang_start::hd7c880a37a646e81
at /buildslave/rust-buildbot/slave/stable-dist-rustc-linux/build/src/libstd/panicking.rs:436
at /buildslave/rust-buildbot/slave/stable-dist-rustc-linux/build/src/libstd/panic.rs:361
at /buildslave/rust-buildbot/slave/stable-dist-rustc-linux/build/src/libstd/rt.rs:57
9: 0x55c39a22e9e9 - main
10: 0x7f5e5ed3382f - __libc_start_main
11: 0x55c39a22e6b8 - _start
12: 0x0 - <unknown>
after
thread 'main' panicked at 'explicit panic', foo.rs:2
stack backtrace:
0: std::sys::imp::backtrace::tracing::imp::unwind_backtrace
at /checkout/src/libstd/sys/unix/backtrace/tracing/gcc_s.rs:49
1: std::sys_common::backtrace::_print
at /checkout/src/libstd/sys_common/backtrace.rs:71
2: std::panicking::default_hook::{{closure}}
at /checkout/src/libstd/sys_common/backtrace.rs:60
at /checkout/src/libstd/panicking.rs:355
3: std::panicking::default_hook
at /checkout/src/libstd/panicking.rs:371
4: std::panicking::rust_panic_with_hook
at /checkout/src/libstd/panicking.rs:549
5: std::panicking::begin_panic
6: foo::main
7: __rust_maybe_catch_panic
at /checkout/src/libpanic_unwind/lib.rs:98
8: std::rt::lang_start
at /checkout/src/libstd/panicking.rs:433
at /checkout/src/libstd/panic.rs:361
at /checkout/src/libstd/rt.rs:57
9: main
10: __libc_start_main
11: _start
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| ([127, 0, 0, 1], 3000).into()) | ||
| `` | ||
|
|
||
| This removes some uneccesary run-time parsing, and is roughly as readable, depending on |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
uneccesary -> unnecessary
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| #### Cargo features | ||
|
|
||
| Other than the previous mentioned `build.rs` changes, Cargo has a few new improvements. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
previous mentioned -> previously mentioned?
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| SocketAddr::from(([127, 0, 0, 1], 3000)) | ||
| // or even | ||
| ([127, 0, 0, 1], 3000).into()) | ||
| `` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Missing a backtick here.
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| 1.17.0][notes] on GitHub. | ||
|
|
||
| [install]: https://www.rust-lang.org/install.html | ||
| [notes]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/RELEASES.md#version-1170-2017-04-27 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note that for at least the posts announcing Rust 1.0 to 1.3, the "release notes" links are to /master/ and the linked anchor no longer exists on the page so the user has to scroll to find the right spot. The Rust 1.4 post links to release notes with a /[commit-id]/ link instead, so the outdated anchor tag format still works.
Consider either updating these links after publication to each point at a specific version of the release notes file, or updating the now broken links in those posts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, we've been doing master for a while, as the old ones are never modfied.
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| That is, the `x, y` form will assume that its values are set to a varaible | ||
| with the same name in its scope. | ||
|
|
||
| In a similar way, it's common for new Rustaceans to try to use `+` to add two |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure that this new paragraph is "in a similar way" to the previous two. Those let you type less code to get the same behavior. This one is just changing an error message.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, "similar" here was the overall topic of the release: small ergonomic changes. I'll re-word.
|
|
||
| Another similar improvement is "field init shorthand." Similar to ECMAScript 6, | ||
| which calls this "Object Literal Property Value Shorthand", duplication can be | ||
| removed when declaring structs, like this: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you have a link to more information or documentation about this feature? It should appear somewhere right? The Reference? Something like that? I don't know where to look, but I'm guessing it has to be there somewhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's in the reference, there's a PR open for RBE (to be merged after the release thanks to RBE's deploy process), and the book should mention it.
There's not more to it than what's described here, though.
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| and you can use `build = false` to opt out. | ||
|
|
||
| This release marks [the removal](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/39431) | ||
| of the old `Makefile` based build system. We announced this new system in 1.15, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"this new system"
Since a new system hasn't been mentioned previously in this paragraph, perhaps the text here could say "the new system."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or...
The new system, announced in Rust 1.15, is written in Rust and primarily uses Cargo to drive the build. It is now mature enough to always use.
| and [it's now being used](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/39633) to render | ||
| our various book-like documentation: | ||
|
|
||
| * [The book](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/book/) ([repo](https://github.com/rust-lang/book)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This isn't generally applicable to all /stable/ links, but it could be appropriate to link these to /1.17.0/ rather than /stable/, since the point of the links was to showcase some kind of specific difference in rendering. If the rendering changes again in the future, the link to /stable/ would probably land the user on something that wasn't actually generated with mdBook.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In general we always default to /stable, I agree that maybe changing this convention in the future is a good idea though
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| moved out of tree. Also, we've added a fourth book, still in-tree: [The | ||
| Unstable Book](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/unstable-book/). This | ||
| provides an overview of unstable features by name, contains links to their | ||
| tracking issues, and may contain initial documentation of the feature. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps just scratch out "the feature", since it doesn't match with "features" and "links" from earlier in the sentence.
| notice once they were no longer connected to the internet. In addition, | ||
| some users *did* want to have a local copy of the docs, regardless of | ||
| their connectivity. As such, we've [reverted the change](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/40526), and documentation is being | ||
| installed by default again. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cool, can you also link me to something explaining exactly what this means, how I'd use it, where to find it, etc.?
Also, that long line could take a break.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no idea where this is, if @brson has ideas for a link, please add them in!
| [`collections::Bound`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/enum.Bound.html | ||
| [`process::abort`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/process/fn.abort.html | ||
| [`ptr::read_unaligned`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/ptr/fn.read_unaligned.html | ||
| [`ptr::write_unaligned`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/ptr/fn.write_unaligned.html |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should all these be to /stable/ like the earlier links were? Is that the most forward-appropriate link to be using?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
these URLs are an alias to /stable; now that they're stable, they should always be there.
| Other than the previously mentioned `build.rs` changes, Cargo has a few new improvements. | ||
| [`cargo check --all`](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/3731) and | ||
| [`cargo run --package`](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/3691) are two missing | ||
| flags that are now supported. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What do they do, can you link me to the documentation for these new flags?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
there's no specific new docs, as these do what cargo check and cargo run do as normal, but were just missing these standard flags
|
|
||
| Now, `cargo build` will only build our `postgres-tool` if we have the two features | ||
| set, and so we can write a normal `fn main` without all the `cfg` nonsense getting | ||
| in the way. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you fill in at least enough of the part currently marked # ... after [[bin]] to show how one of these targets works. The examples on the crates.io docs (wouldn't hurt to link) don't actually show any usage of multiple [[bin]] sections, so I couldn't figure out what this meant until I eventually broke down and did a Google search.
Actually, it seems kind of backwards that this release notes example is more thorough than the one on the crates.io site. Maybe someone can ping whoever is in charge of those?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you fill in at least enough of the part currently marked # ... after [[bin]] to show how one of these targets works.
That would depend on the details of the project itself, which isn't the important part here.
Maybe someone can ping whoever is in charge of those?
Guess who that is? :) Anyone could port this back to Cargo's docs, and in general, I have a "rehaul Cargo's docs) on my plate in the future.
|
The relnotes now point to a temporary branch since master is not updated. |
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| }; | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| That is, the `x, y` form will assume that its values are set to a varaible |
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| 17 new bits of API were stabilized this release: | ||
|
|
||
| * [`Arc::into_raw`] and [`Rc::into_raw`] let you consume an `Arc` or `Rc` and get a raw pointer. | ||
| * [`Arc::from_raw`] and [`Rc::from_raw`] let you take that raw pointer and get an `Arc` or `Rc`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
{Arc/Rc}::ptr_eq are missing here.
_posts/2017-04-27-Rust-1.17.md
Outdated
| 11: _start | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| By default. As the message says, you can set an environment variable to get the full |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This seems weird to me. "The full backtrace is now the full backtrace By Default. As the >missing< message says [...] to get the full backtrace."
This should show the new default backtrace instead. Otherwise this wording doesn't make much sense.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, this is quite weird. There used to be a message that says you can switch the backtrace. Apparently this message doesn't show anymore and thus the last sentence is missing some context. Also it used to omit the libc start frames, so this is pretty weird why this "regressed" so much.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, so it seems like this is actually a bug. Apparently the old frame pruning was too aggressive, so it got removed and then backported. However the message for the environment variable that shows the full backtrace only comes up when stack frames are pruned. So this message will never come up anymore.
r? @rust-lang/core