From iterator for more tuples

[shahn]

No description provided.

[rustbot]

r? @joboet

rustbot has assigned @joboet.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[shahn]

this really is just a draft to extend on #132187 and should not be merged for now. I am not sure if these two impl stabilizations should be separate or not. Will rebase this and un-draft if #132187 gets accepted

r? libs-api

[Amanieu]

@rfcbot fcp merge

This is similar to #132187 and notably allows collecting an iterator of tuples into a separate collection for each tuple element. Support for this already existed for pairs, this PR extends it to arbitrary tuples.

[rfcbot]

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

• @Amanieu
• @BurntSushi
• @dtolnay
• @joshtriplett
• @m-ou-se

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.

[shahn]

With #132187 merged, this should be ready for review now :)

[shahn]

@BurntSushi @joshtriplett @m-ou-se friendly ping if you could give your verdict :)

[rfcbot]

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

[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.

This will be merged soon.

[Amanieu]

LGTM apart from the indentation issue.

[shahn]

Wait what, this auto-closed somehow. In any case, I hope I fixed the formatting issues. Thank you

[Amanieu]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 10b2351 has been approved by Amanieu

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 10b2351 with merge 78af7da...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Amanieu
Pushing 78af7da to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (78af7da): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.2%	[0.1%, 0.3%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

Results (primary 1.4%, secondary -2.9%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.4%	[1.4%, 1.4%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.9%	[-2.9%, -2.9%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.4%	[1.4%, 1.4%]	1

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 763.112s -> 764.241s (0.15%)
Artifact size: 330.55 MiB -> 330.53 MiB (-0.01%)