Truncated history.

Kani (originally 'RMC') used to be a fork of Rust.
This later changed, and this history truncation is the result of filtering out
Rust's history and some of its files from the Kani repo, to reduce repo size.
Some more information about this truncation can be found here:
model-checking/kani#991

Kani originally pursued a rebase strategy for syncing with rustc and then
switched to merging, before finally using rustc as a library.
When this git history was truncated, this commit had rustc parent:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/f8810ee171d1549cfb4082d4e1289704aad722e9
This commit reflects the last time the rebase strategy was applied.

Author: tedinski

.editorconfig

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+# EditorConfig helps developers define and maintain consistent
+# coding styles between different editors and IDEs
+# editorconfig.org
+
+root = true
+
+[*]
+end_of_line = lf
+charset = utf-8
+trim_trailing_whitespace = true
+insert_final_newline = true
+indent_style = space
+indent_size = 4
+
+[*.md]
+# double whitespace at end of line
+# denotes a line break in Markdown
+trim_trailing_whitespace = false
+
+[*.yml]
+indent_size = 2

.gitattributes

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+[attr]rust text eol=lf whitespace=tab-in-indent,trailing-space,tabwidth=4
+
+* text=auto eol=lf
+*.cpp rust
+*.h rust
+*.rs rust diff=rust
+*.fixed linguist-language=Rust
+*.mir linguist-language=Rust
+src/etc/installer/gfx/* binary
+src/vendor/** -text
+Cargo.lock linguist-generated=false
+config.toml.example linguist-language=TOML
+
+# Older git versions try to fix line endings on images and fonts, this prevents it.
+*.png binary
+*.ico binary
+*.woff binary
+*.woff2 binary

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/blank_issue.md

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+---
+name: Blank Issue
+about: Create a blank issue.
+---

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bug_report.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+name: Bug Report
+about: Create a bug report for Rust.
+labels: C-bug
+---
+<!--
+Thank you for filing a bug report! 🐛 Please provide a short summary of the bug,
+along with any information you feel relevant to replicating the bug.
+-->
+
+I tried this code:
+
+```rust
+<code>
+```
+
+I expected to see this happen: *explanation*
+
+Instead, this happened: *explanation*
+
+### Meta
+<!--
+If you're using the stable version of the compiler, you should also check if the
+bug also exists in the beta or nightly versions.
+-->
+
+`rustc --version --verbose`:
+```
+<version>
+```
+
+<!--
+Include a backtrace in the code block by setting `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` in your
+environment. E.g. `RUST_BACKTRACE=1 cargo build`.
+-->
+<details><summary>Backtrace</summary>
+<p>
+
+```
+<backtrace>
+```
+
+</p>
+</details>

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/config.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+blank_issues_enabled: true
+contact_links:
+  - name: Question
+    url: https://users.rust-lang.org
+    about: Please ask and answer questions about Rust on the user forum.
+  - name: Feature Request
+    url: https://internals.rust-lang.org/
+    about: Please discuss language feature requests on the internals forum.

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/diagnostics.md

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+---
+name: Diagnostic issue
+about: Create a bug report or feature request for a change to `rustc`'s error output
+labels: A-diagnostics, T-compiler
+---
+<!--
+Thank you for filing a bug report! 🐛 Please provide a short summary of the bug,
+along with any information you feel relevant to replicating the bug.
+
+If you cannot produce a minimal reproduction case (something that would work in
+isolation), please provide the steps or even link to a repository that causes
+the problematic output to occur.
+-->
+
+Given the following code: <!-- Please provide a link to play.rust-lang.org -->
+
+```rust
+<code>
+```
+
+The current output is:
+
+```
+<rustc output>
+```
+
+<!-- The following is not always necessary. -->
+Ideally the output should look like:
+
+```
+<proposed output>
+```
+
+<!--
+If the problem is not self-explanatory, please provide a rationale for the
+change.
+-->
+
+<!--
+If dramatically different output is caused by small changes, consider also
+adding them here.
+
+If you're using the stable version of the compiler, you should also check if the
+bug also exists in the beta or nightly versions. The output might also be
+different depending on the Edition.
+-->

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ice.md

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+---
+name: Internal Compiler Error
+about: Create a report for an internal compiler error in rustc.
+labels: C-bug, I-ICE, T-compiler
+---
+<!--
+Thank you for finding an Internal Compiler Error! 🧊  If possible, try to provide
+a minimal verifiable example. You can read "Rust Bug Minimization Patterns" for
+how to create smaller examples.
+
+http://blog.pnkfx.org/blog/2019/11/18/rust-bug-minimization-patterns/
+
+-->
+
+### Code
+
+```Rust
+<code>
+```
+
+
+### Meta
+<!--
+If you're using the stable version of the compiler, you should also check if the
+bug also exists in the beta or nightly versions.
+-->
+
+`rustc --version --verbose`:
+```
+<version>
+```
+
+### Error output
+
+```
+<output>
+```
+
+<!--
+Include a backtrace in the code block by setting `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` in your
+environment. E.g. `RUST_BACKTRACE=1 cargo build`.
+-->
+<details><summary><strong>Backtrace</strong></summary>
+<p>
+
+```
+<backtrace>
+```
+
+</p>
+</details>
+

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/library_tracking_issue.md

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+---
+name: Library Tracking Issue
+about: A tracking issue for an unstable library feature.
+title: Tracking Issue for XXX
+labels: C-tracking-issue, T-libs-api
+---
+<!--
+Thank you for creating a tracking issue!
+
+Tracking issues are for tracking a feature from implementation to stabilization.
+
+Make sure to include the relevant RFC for the feature if it has one.
+
+If the new feature is small, it may be fine to skip the RFC process. In that
+case, you can use use `issue = "none"` in your initial implementation PR. The
+reviewer will ask you to open a tracking issue if they agree your feature can be
+added without an RFC.
+-->
+
+Feature gate: `#![feature(...)]`
+
+This is a tracking issue for ...
+
+<!--
+Include a short description of the feature.
+-->
+
+### Public API
+
+<!--
+For most library features, it'd be useful to include a summarized version of the public API.
+(E.g. just the public function signatures without their doc comments or implementation.)
+-->
+
+```rust
+// core::magic
+
+pub struct Magic;
+
+impl Magic {
+    pub fn magic(self);
+}
+```
+
+### Steps / History
+
+<!--
+For larger features, more steps might be involved.
+If the feature is changed later, please add those PRs here as well.
+-->
+
+- [ ] Implementation: #...
+- [ ] Final comment period (FCP)
+- [ ] Stabilization PR
+
+<!--
+Once the feature has gone through a few release cycles and there are no
+unresolved questions left, the feature might be ready for stabilization.
+
+If this feature didn't go through the RFC process, a final comment period
+(FCP) is always needed before stabilization. This works as follows:
+
+A library API team member can kick off the stabilization process, at which point
+the rfcbot will ask all the team members to verify they agree with
+stabilization. Once enough members agree and there are no concerns, the final
+comment period begins: this issue will be marked as such and will be listed
+in the next This Week in Rust newsletter. If no blocking concerns are raised in
+that period of 10 days, a stabilzation PR can be opened by anyone.
+-->
+
+### Unresolved Questions
+
+<!--
+Include any open questions that need to be answered before the feature can be
+stabilised. If multiple (unrelated) big questions come up, it can be a good idea
+to open a separate issue for each, to make it easier to keep track of the
+discussions.
+
+It's useful to link any relevant discussions and conclusions (whether on GitHub,
+Zulip, or the internals forum) here.
+-->
+
+- None yet.

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/regression.md

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+---
+name: Regression
+about: Report something that unexpectedly changed between Rust versions.
+labels: C-bug, regression-untriaged
+---
+<!--
+Thank you for filing a regression report! 🐛 A regression is something that changed between versions of Rust but was not supposed to.
+
+Please provide a short summary of the regression, along with any information you feel is relevant to replicate it.
+-->
+
+### Code
+
+I tried this code:
+
+```rust
+<code>
+```
+
+I expected to see this happen: *explanation*
+
+Instead, this happened: *explanation*
+
+### Version it worked on
+
+<!--
+Provide the most recent version this worked on, for example:
+
+It most recently worked on: Rust 1.47
+-->
+
+It most recently worked on: <!-- version -->
+
+### Version with regression
+
+<!--
+Provide the version you are using that has the regression.
+-->
+
+`rustc --version --verbose`:
+```
+<version>
+```
+
+<!--
+Did the compiler crash? If so, please provide a backtrace.
+-->
+
+### Backtrace
+<!--
+Include a backtrace in the code block by setting `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` in your
+environment. E.g. `RUST_BACKTRACE=1 cargo build`.
+-->
+<details><summary>Backtrace</summary>
+<p>
+
+```
+<backtrace>
+```
+
+</p>
+</details>
+
+<!--
+If you know when this regression occurred, please add a line like below, replacing `{channel}` with one of stable, beta, or nightly.
+
+@rustbot modify labels: +regression-from-stable-to-{channel} -regression-untriaged
+-->