feat: Add matches_prerelease semantic

[linyihai]

What does this PR try to resolve?

One implementaion for #13290

Thanks to @Eh2406 feedback, a working version came out, and I think it should be able to test under the nightly feature.

This PR proposes a matches_prerelease semantic.

req	matches	matches_prerelease	matches_prerelease_mirror_node 2
Op::Exact
=I.J.K	=I.J.K	>=I.J.K, <I.J.(K+1)-0	>=I.J.K, <I.J.(K+1)-0
=I.J	>=I.J.0, <I.(J+1).0	>=I.J.0, <I.(J+1).0-0	>=I.J.0-0, <I.(J+1).0-0
=I	>=I.0.0, <(I+1).0.0	>=I.0.0, <(I+1).0.0-0	>=I.0.0-0, <(I+1).0.0-0
Op::Greater
>I.J.K	>I.J.K	>I.J.K	>I.J.K
>I.J	>=I.(J+1).0	>=I.(J+1).0-0	>=I.(J+1).0-0
>I	>=(I+1).0.0	>=(I+1).0.0-0	>=(I+1).0.0-0
Op::GreaterEq
>=I.J.K	>=I.J.K	>=I.J.K	>=I.J.K
>=I.J	>=I.J.0	>=I.J.0	>=I.J.0-0
>=I	>=I.0.0	>=I.0.0	>=I.0.0-0
Op::Less
<I.J.K	<I.J.K	<I.J.K or I.J.K-0 depends 1	<I.J.K
<I.J	<I.J.0	<I.J.0-0	<I.J.0-0
<I	<I.0.0	<I.0.0-0	<I.0.0-0
Op::LessEq
<=I.J.K	<=I.J.K	<=I.J.K	<=I.J.K
<=I.J	<I.(J+1).0	<I.(J+1).0-0	<I.(J+1).0-0
<=I	<(I+1).0.0	<(I+1).0.0-0	<(I+1).0.0-0
Op::Tilde
~I.J.K	>=I.J.K, <I.(J+1).0	>=I.J.K, <I.(J+1).0-0	>=I.J.K, <I.(J+1).0-0
~I.J	=I.J	>=I.J.0, <I.(J+1).0-0	>=I.J.0, <I.(J+1).0-0
~I	=I	>=I.0.0, <(I+1).0.0-0	>=I.0.0, <(I+1).0.0-0
Op::Caret
^I.J.K (for I>0)	>=I.J.K, <(I+1).0.0	>=I.J.K, <(I+1).0.0-0	>=I.J.K, <(I+1).0.0-0
^0.J.K (for J>0)	>=0.J.K, <0.(J+1).0	>=0.J.K, <0.(J+1).0-0	>=0.J.K-0, <0.(J+1).0-0
^0.0.K	=0.0.K	>=0.0.K, <0.0.(K+1)-0	>=0.J.K-0, <0.(J+1).0-0
^I.J	^I.J.0	>=I.J.0, <(I+1).0.0-0	>=I.J.0-0, <(I+1).0.0-0
^0.0	=0.0	>=0.0.0, <0.1.0-0	>=0.0.0-0, <0.1.0-0
^I	=I	>=I.0.0, <(I+1).0.0-0	>=I.0.0-0, <(I+1).0.0-0
Op::Wildcard
I.J.*	=I.J	>=I.J.0, <I.(J+1).0-0	>=I.J.0-0, <I.(J+1).0-0
I.* or I.*.*	=I	>=I.0.0, <(I+1).0.0-0	>=I.0.0-0, <(I+1).0.0-0

Notes:

• <I.J.K: This is equivalent to <I.J.K-0 if no lower bound or the lower bound isn't pre-release, otherwise this is equivalent to <I.J.K.

• matches_prerelease_mirror_node is yet another implementation of node semver compatibility (with includePrerelease=true) test. This is extrapolated from the test cases and is not necessarily the same as the node implementation

Besides, the proposed semtantic left a unsolved issuse , I don't have clear idea to handle it.

How should we test and review this PR?

The tests in src/cargo/util/semver_eval_ext.rs are designed to reflect current semantic.

Additional information

Migrated from dtolnay/semver#321

TBO, this feature was not conceived in advance plus the semantic is unclear at first. I need to experiment step by step and find out what I think makes sense. My experiment can be seen this comment.

[rustbot]

r? @weihanglo

rustbot has assigned @weihanglo.
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

[epage]

I've not gone into a lot of the details yet, more focusing on the high level

[weihanglo]

Really appreciate your efforts on prerelease!

[weihanglo]

Should we have some mod-level comments explaining what have been copied over from semver and why?

[linyihai]

No problems.

[Eh2406]

Thank you all for doing work on this. I am going on vacation and will not be able to look at or think about this for 2 weeks.

One open design question is whether "matches implies matches_prerelease" is an axiom of our design. If it is then there are all kinds of (obscure) corner cases we need to track down and decide how to deal with. In general we should modify the new thing to meet our axioms. But given how obscure the cases are we should also consider modifying the existing behavior. Breakage will probably be only theoretical.

Please do not let my absence slow down this effort. When people feel it's ready, let's merge this PR. Unstable features are cheap to change if we change our mind.

[linyihai]

The forced update commits just updated the comments of the code .

And I had updated the semantic in the PR description, exspecially for <I.J.K.

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #14412) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[epage]

Unsure if this commit is worth it. In theory, semver_eval_ext will be going away and we'll have to undo this.

[linyihai]

Well, this commit is not very important for this PR. We can decide what to do with it later.

[epage]

Thanks!

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit bdf19e0 has been approved by epage

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit bdf19e0 with merge a0acc29...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: epage
Pushing a0acc29 to master...