Make {Rc,Arc}::allocator associated functions

[glandium]

No description provided.

[rustbot]

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[tgross35]

Context: #89132 (comment), that PR just landed a few hours ago.

I'm marking this prioritize since it fixes a (just recently introduced) namespace regression on types like Rc<Vec<T>> - but chance of that conflict is pretty small, so feel free to adjust if this isn't suitable.

@rustbot label +I-prioritize -T-libs +T-libs-api +A-allocators

[tgross35]

r? libs-api

[tgross35]

Pretty easy to id but here's a repro

#![feature(allocator_api)]

use std::rc::Rc;

struct Foo;

impl Foo {
    fn allocator(&self) -> u32 { 100 }
}

fn main() {
    let rc = Rc::new(Foo);
    dbg!(rc.allocator());
}

Output on latest nightly:

warning: method `allocator` is never used
...
[foo.rs:15] rc.allocator() = Global

Output on older nightly:

[foo.rs:15] rc.allocator() = 100

[apiraino]

@tgross35 we use the I-prioritize label for issues that need to be assigned a priority, not for patches (but thanks for raising the flag). If you are asking for an expedit review you might prefer talking with someone involved with #89132 (maybe open a topic on Zulip?) and assign to them.

@rustbot label -I-prioritize

[tgross35]

Whoops, "Indicates that prioritization has been requested for this issue" I can see why that can be read two different ways. In that case, @Amanieu reviewed the other PR so may want to do this one.

r? amanieu

[Amanieu]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit b1398ca has been approved by Amanieu

It is now in the queue for this repository.