Skip to content

Tracking Issue for mixed_integer_ops_unsigned_sub #126043

Closed

Description

@davidzeng0

Feature gate: #![feature(mixed_integer_ops_unsigned_sub)]

This is a tracking issue for rust-lang/libs-team#386

Public API

impl uX {
    pub const fn checked_sub_signed(self, iX) -> Option<Self>;
    pub const fn overflowing_sub_signed(self, iX) -> (Self, bool);
    pub const fn saturating_sub_signed(self, iX) -> Self;
    pub const fn wrapping_sub_signed(self, iX) -> Self;
}

Steps / History

Unresolved Questions

  • None yet.

Footnotes

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

Activity

  1. added
    C-tracking-issueCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFC
    T-libs-api[DEPRECATED; DO NOT USE]
    on Jun 5, 2024
  2. added a commit that references this issue on Nov 13, 2024
  3. added a commit that references this issue on Nov 14, 2024
  4. nxsaken commented on May 29, 2025

    @nxsaken
    Contributor

    Discovered this through the unstable checked_sub_signed. Looks like the impl (#126046) was merged last year. What's needed to stabilize this?

  5. rustbot commented on Jun 3, 2025

    @rustbot
    Collaborator

    Error: Only Rust team members can ping teams.

    Please file an issue on GitHub at triagebot if there's a problem with this bot, or reach out on #t-infra on Zulip.

  6. callmeclover commented on Jun 5, 2025

    @callmeclover

    @Amanieu @rust-lang/libs Can we start FCP on this? The ACP (rust-lang/libs-team#386) and implementation (#126046) passed last year.

  7. Amanieu commented on Jun 9, 2025

    @Amanieu
    Member

    I'm not a huge fan of overflowing_* methods but I think it's fine in this case since it is consistent with the existing ones. The other methods seem fine to me.

    @rfcbot merge

  8. rfcbot commented on Jun 9, 2025

    @rfcbot

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

    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.

  9. added
    proposed-final-comment-periodProposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off.
    disposition-mergeThis issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it.
    final-comment-periodIn the final comment period and will be merged soon unless new substantive objections are raised.
    and removed
    proposed-final-comment-periodProposed to merge/close by relevant subteam, see T-<team> label. Will enter FCP once signed off.
    on Jun 9, 2025
  10. rfcbot commented on Jun 10, 2025

    @rfcbot

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

  11. 3 remaining items

  12. added a commit that references this issue on Jul 7, 2025
    00c67d1
  13. added a commit that references this issue on Jul 7, 2025
    7b06dfb
  14. added 2 commits that reference this issue on Jul 8, 2025
    b37d11e
    03c864d
  15. added this to the 1.90.0 milestone on Aug 21, 2025
  16. added a commit that references this issue on Sep 24, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    C-tracking-issueCategory: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFCT-libs-api[DEPRECATED; DO NOT USE]disposition-mergeThis issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it.finished-final-comment-periodThe final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue.

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions