On Fri Jun 20, 2025 at 11:02 PM JST, Alice Ryhl wrote: > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 3:59 PM Alexandre Courbot <acour...@nvidia.com> wrote: >> > Similarly, if they stabilize the `Alignment` one (only) and we end up >> > only using our `PowerOfTwo<T>` for `usize` and those use cases, then >> > we should consider using the upstream one (and adding any/all methods >> > that we need). >> >> `Alignment` is very close to what we need, so I don't see a reason to >> not adopt the same name at the very least. >> >> This reminds me that I should also check whether upstream Rust would be >> interested in `prev_multiple_of` and `last_set_bit`. The docs I've read >> for contributing looked a bit intimidating, with RFCs to write and all. >> Would you have a pointer for where I should start? Maybe a Zulip thread? > > If you want to add a new library function, the correct procedure would > be opening an ACP, which is more light-weight than the RFC process: > https://std-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/development/feature-lifecycle.html > > RFCs are mainly for much bigger changes.
Belated thanks for the suggestion; I have finally opened an ACP for `last_set_bit` (and `first_set_bit` while we are at it): https://github.com/rust-lang/libs-team/issues/631 I am still entangled with how to best leverage `Alignment` for our purposes, but think I am getting close to a v2 of this patchset.
