-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 155
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
Implement get_many_mut #238
Open
NiklasJonsson
wants to merge
6
commits into
indexmap-rs:master
Choose a base branch
from
NiklasJonsson:get_many_mut
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
d3f1968
Implement get_many_mut
NiklasJonsson 66108be
Reduce (unsafe) code with array::map and pointers
NiklasJonsson 72f0146
Implement get_many_index_mut & and add docs
NiklasJonsson 5795fe3
fix comment and add test for many_index oob
NiklasJonsson dfa303b
change oob panic to debug assert
NiklasJonsson 9f800a0
Avoid using format features not preset on MSRV
NiklasJonsson File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This still creates aliasing
&mut
betweenentries
and the previous iterations, which is not allowed. I suggest usingself.as_entries_mut().as_mut_ptr()
to start with a pointer, then&mut (*entries_ptr.add(i)).value
for each index.We probably need a manual bounds-check too, but that can be part of the loop scanning for duplicates. In theory,
get_index_of
should always be in-bounds, but better safe than sorry...There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't understand how it can create aliasing
&mut
forentries
. I only get a&mut
to a specific element ofentries
(only the value member of that element) and while that references has a lifetime ofentries
, it is not mutably borrowing all ofentries
, no? Maybe I'm misunderstand reference/lifetime semantics and what is allowed. Using the pointer doesn't affect the guarantee of the function: each&mut
reference that comes out of this function is unique so what difference will it make?Yeah that makes sense if pointers are the way to go but it should still panic rather than return None, I assume?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
By the way, I did run miri on the tests like:
but I know miri doesn't catch all cases of undefined behaviour.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, maybe I understand. The variable
entries
is&mut [Bucket<K, V>]
so it is a mutable reference the whole slice but the arrayout
also holds mutable references to individual elements, which alias withentries
. Is this what you are referring to?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, that's it. I'm a little surprised that miri doesn't see any problem, but I think it's because slice indexing is an intrinsic operation in MIR, so miri doesn't really see any use of the entire
entries
. If you force it to go through theIndexMut
trait,entries.index_mut(i)
, then it does complain:Yeah, if
get_index_of
returns a bad index, then we have internal errors, so a panic is fine.