Tracking Issue for `Atomic*::from_ptr` and `const_atomic_from_ptr`

[WaffleLapkin]

Feature gate: #![feature(atomic_from_ptr)], #![feature(const_atomic_from_ptr)]

This is a tracking issue for Atomic*::from_ptr set of functions.

Public API

// core::atomic

impl AtomicBool { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut bool) -> &'a AtomicBool; }

impl<T> AtomicPtr<T> { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut *mut T) -> &'a AtomicPtr<T>; }

impl AtomicU8    { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut u8)    -> &'a AtomicU8;    }
impl AtomicU16   { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut u16)   -> &'a AtomicU16;   }
impl AtomicU32   { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut u32)   -> &'a AtomicU32;   }
impl AtomicU64   { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut u64)   -> &'a AtomicU64;   }
impl AtomicUsize { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut usize) -> &'a AtomicUsize; }

impl AtomicI8    { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut i8)    -> &'a AtomicI8;    }
impl AtomicI16   { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut i16)   -> &'a AtomicI16;   }
impl AtomicI32   { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut i32)   -> &'a AtomicI32;   }
impl AtomicI64   { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut i64)   -> &'a AtomicI64;   }
impl AtomicIsize { pub const unsafe fn from_ptr<'a>(ptr: *mut isize) -> &'a AtomicIsize; }

Steps / History

• Implementation: Add Atomic*::from_ptr #108540
• Final comment period (FCP)¹
• Stabilization PR - Stabilize atomic_from_ptr #115719

Unresolved Questions

• None yet.

Footnotes

1. https://std-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/feature-lifecycle/stabilization.html ↩

[tgross35]

I think there is a duplication in the docs, I think the bool line shouldn't be there?

Other than that, do you have any opposition to me opening a stabilization PR @WaffleLapkin? This hasn't been around super long but it seems uncontroversial, and mirrors as_ptr.

[WaffleLapkin]

@tgross35 I have no opposition, however do note that the decision here is on the libs-api team =)

you may want to reach out to them in the zulip for example

[tgross35]

@tgross35 I have no opposition, however do note that the decision here is on the libs-api team =)

Rightieo, this change is small enough that I opened #115719 to get the ball rolling

[Dylan-DPC]

Stabilised in #115719

[tgross35]

Reopening this since the const gate still points here