On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 11:20:32AM +0200, Alice Ryhl wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 4:52 AM Danilo Krummrich <dakr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 12:32:15PM -0700, Boqun Feng wrote: > > > Hi Danilo, > > > > > > I'm trying to put your series on rust-dev, but I hit a few conflicts due > > > to the conflict with `Box::drop_contents`, which has been in rust-dev > > > for a while. And the conflict is not that trivial for me to resolve. > > > So just a head-up, that's a requirement for me to put it on rust-dev for > > > more tests from my end ;-) > > > > I rebased everything and you can fetch them from [1]. > > > > I resolved the following conflicts: > > > > - for `Box`, implement > > - `drop_contents` > > - `manually_drop_contents` [2] > > Not sure I like this name. It sounds like something that runs the > destructor, but it does the exact opposite. I thought it kinda makes sense, since it's analogous to `ManuallyDrop::new`. What about `Box::forget_contents` instead? > > > - ``move_out` [2] > > - `BorrowedMut` for `ForeignOwnable` for `Box<T, A>` and `Pin<Box<T, A>>` > > - `InPlaceWrite` and updated `InPlaceInit` > > - for `RBTreeNode`, make use of `Box::move_out` to replace the original > > implementation partially moving out of `Box` > > > > @Alice: Please have a look at the changes for `RBTreeNode`. Maybe it's also > > worth having them in a separate patch. > > RBTree changes LGTM. > > Alice >
