Skip to content

Tracking issue for Iterator::copied #57127

Closed

Description

@sugar700

This is a tracking issue for Iterator::copied.

Added in #56534. Feature gate: #![feature(iter_copied)].

Related feature: copied in #57126.

Activity

  1. added
    C-tracking-issueCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFC
    on Dec 26, 2018
  2. added
    T-libs-api[DEPRECATED; DO NOT USE]
    B-unstableBlocker: Implemented in the nightly compiler and unstable.
    on Dec 28, 2018
  3. SimonSapin commented on Feb 1, 2019

    @SimonSapin
    Contributor

    @Centril, do you feel your comment in #57126 (comment) is still an objection to the state of this feature, given the response in #57126 (comment)?

  4. Centril commented on Feb 1, 2019

    @Centril
    Contributor

    @SimonSapin So ultimately, #57970 was closed meaning that we are comfortable with the specialization. If that specialization is always in place then Copied is a redundant type (and the impls that come with it are also redundant). However, keeping the cost and the Copied type also has less of a risk attached to it so there's a trade-off here. I don't know what the right choice is, but those are the facts as I see them.

  5. sugar700 commented on Feb 6, 2019

    @sugar700
    ContributorAuthor

    @hellow554 Fixed :).

  6. sugar700 commented on Mar 12, 2019

    @sugar700
    ContributorAuthor
  7. Manishearth commented on Apr 15, 2019

    @Manishearth
    Member

    @Centril Is there anything blocking stabilization here? We'd like to suggest this in Clippy, see rust-lang/rust-clippy#3958

    (The crux is that .copied() is clearer than .map(|&x| x), but .cloned() gives off the wrong impression)

  8. Centril commented on Apr 15, 2019

    @Centril
    Contributor

    @Manishearth That's not my call... =D

    Picking random libs member... @sfackler is there anything blocking stabilization here?

  9. sfackler commented on Apr 17, 2019

    @sfackler
    Member

    Doesn't seem like it.

    @rfcbot fcp merge

  10. rfcbot commented on Apr 17, 2019

    @rfcbot

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

    No concerns currently listed.

    Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), 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.

  11. added
    proposed-final-comment-periodProposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off.
    disposition-mergeThis issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it.
    final-comment-periodIn the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised.
    and removed
    proposed-final-comment-periodProposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off.
    on Apr 17, 2019
  12. rfcbot commented on Apr 17, 2019

    @rfcbot

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

  13. added and removed
    final-comment-periodIn the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised.
    on Apr 27, 2019
  14. rfcbot commented on Apr 27, 2019

    @rfcbot

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

    As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed.

    The RFC will be merged soon.

  15. added a commit that references this issue on Apr 28, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    B-unstableBlocker: Implemented in the nightly compiler and unstable.C-tracking-issueCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFCT-libs-api[DEPRECATED; DO NOT USE]disposition-mergeThis issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it.finished-final-comment-periodThe final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue.

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions