Not mentioned, but the previous release's feature of capturing idents in format strings automatically did not work for `unreachable!`, ie `let x = 5; unreachable!("{x}");` panicked with the message `"{x}"` instead of `"5"`. This is fixed in 1.59
Dear Rust Team, Thank you for your hard work! Rust helps me be more productive. It makes our systems more reliable, which reduces stress. And sometimes I have fun while working with it. :)
Good stuff in here. But since they found a bug which caused them to disable incremental compilation by default for this release, I'll likely skip this one and wait a few weeks for 1.60.0 (which these release notes state will likely address the problem and restore default incremental compilation)
Really looking forward to const generics becoming more and more useful in the future! A current limitation I hit yesterday is that you can't use a (non-literal) expression as a const generic parameter yet. I wanted to specify 32KiB as "32 * 1024" but had to write "32768" instead.
Neat! Interestingly Ada has had this feature since its inception around 1983 (use in action with CPUID - <a href="https://gist.github.com/AdaDoom3/6466215" rel="nofollow">https://gist.github.com/AdaDoom3/6466215</a>).
> Today's release falls on the day in which the world's attention is captured by the sudden invasion of Ukraine by Putin's forces. Before going into the details of the new Rust release, we'd like to state that we stand in solidarity with the people of Ukraine and express our support for all people affected by this conflict.
Very much a rust newbie. What is this syntax called?<p>> inout(reg) a,<p>inout looks like a function but I don't see how that works with the `a` variable. Is this some magic specifically for asm!?
It was only a few years ago (2015?) that people asking for destructured assignment were treated like simpletons, with a long, jargon-laden explanation how the language formal syntax for destructured "let" was incompatible with assignment syntax as it was then, as if syntax were not something that could be extended anytime, or as if there would be no choice but to express it using the same nonterminals for both.<p>Yet, here it is. I was not fooled, but the attitude left a deep impression.