Add AtomicPtr::null #150736
Merged
Add AtomicPtr::null #150736
+18
−0
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Collaborator
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Member
|
@bors r+ rollup |
Collaborator
rust-bors
bot
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
Collaborator
|
🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 1000. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened. |
Contributor
rust-bors
bot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-review
Kobzol
added a commit
to Kobzol/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 7, 2026
Add AtomicPtr::null fixes rust-lang#98342 r? @GuillaumeGomez Renders intra-doc links in the note text of the `#[deprecated]` attribute. It is quite natural to suggest some other function to use there. So e.g. ```rust #[deprecated(since = "0.0.0", note = "use [`std::mem::size_of`] instead")] ``` renders as <img width="431" height="74" alt="Screenshot from 2026-01-06 12-08-21" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8f608f08-13ee-4bbf-a631-6008058a51e2" />
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 8, 2026
Add AtomicPtr::null Implementation for rust-lang#150733. I marked this function as `#[must_use]` even though the other `AtomicPtr` constructors aren't. It's unclear to me why they aren't already marked as such, I opened a zulip thread asking about it: [#t-libs > Is there a reason AtomicPtr constructors aren't #&rust-lang#91;must_use&rust-lang#93;?](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/219381-t-libs/topic/Is.20there.20a.20reason.20AtomicPtr.20constructors.20aren't.20.23.5Bmust_use.5D.3F/with/566624261).
rust-bors bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 8, 2026
Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - #149976 (Add waker_fn and local_waker_fn to std::task) - #150074 (Update provider API docs) - #150094 (`c_variadic`: provide our own `va_arg` implementation for more targets) - #150164 (rustc: Fix `-Zexport-executable-symbols` on wasm) - #150569 (Ensure that static initializers are acyclic for NVPTX) - #150607 (Add amdgpu_dispatch_ptr intrinsic) - #150694 (./x check miri: enable check_only feature) - #150717 (Thread `--jobs` from `bootstrap` -> `compiletest` -> `run-make-support`) - #150736 (Add AtomicPtr::null) - #150787 (Add myself as co-maintainer for s390x-unknown-linux-musl) - #150789 (Fix copy-n-paste error in `vtable_for` docs) r? @ghost
rust-bors bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 8, 2026
Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - #149976 (Add waker_fn and local_waker_fn to std::task) - #150074 (Update provider API docs) - #150094 (`c_variadic`: provide our own `va_arg` implementation for more targets) - #150164 (rustc: Fix `-Zexport-executable-symbols` on wasm) - #150569 (Ensure that static initializers are acyclic for NVPTX) - #150694 (./x check miri: enable check_only feature) - #150717 (Thread `--jobs` from `bootstrap` -> `compiletest` -> `run-make-support`) - #150736 (Add AtomicPtr::null) - #150787 (Add myself as co-maintainer for s390x-unknown-linux-musl) - #150789 (Fix copy-n-paste error in `vtable_for` docs) r? @ghost
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 8, 2026
Rollup merge of #150736 - atomic-ptr-null, r=joboet Add AtomicPtr::null Implementation for #150733. I marked this function as `#[must_use]` even though the other `AtomicPtr` constructors aren't. It's unclear to me why they aren't already marked as such, I opened a zulip thread asking about it: [#t-libs > Is there a reason AtomicPtr constructors aren't #[must_use]?](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/219381-t-libs/topic/Is.20there.20a.20reason.20AtomicPtr.20constructors.20aren't.20.23.5Bmust_use.5D.3F/with/566624261).
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
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.
Implementation for #150733.
I marked this function as
#[must_use]even though the otherAtomicPtrconstructors aren't. It's unclear to me why they aren't already marked as such, I opened a zulip thread asking about it: #t-libs > Is there a reason AtomicPtr constructors aren't #[must_use]?.