Tracking Issue for `slice_strip` feature

[tesuji]

The feature gate for the issue is #![feature(slice_strip)].

This feature adds two new methods to [T]:

impl<T> [T] {
    /// Returns a subslice with the prefix removed.
    pub fn strip_prefix(&self, prefix: &[T]) -> Option<&[T]> where T: PartialEq;
    /// Returns a subslice with the suffix removed.
    pub fn strip_suffix(&self, suffix: &[T]) -> Option<&[T]> where T: PartialEq;
}

This is an analogy feature like str::strip_{prefix,suffix} but has the same signature of slice's {starts,ends}_with.

About tracking issues

Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also uses as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.

Steps

• Implement the feature (cc @rust-lang/libs)
• Adjust documentation (see instructions on rustc-dev-guide)
• Stabilization PR (see instructions on rustc-dev-guide)

Unresolved Questions

None

Implementation history

• Implemented in Implement slice_strip feature #73414
• Assembly for [u8]: https://rust.godbolt.org/z/iMcqf-

[ijackson]

Hi. I accidentally used one of these functions, I think because I was reading the docs for str :-). So, I conclude that they're useful.

I'd like to see them stabilised. Since the docs tickbox was unticked I looked at the docs, and I have I made an MR for some slight docs wording improvements: #75078

I think this is probably ready for stabilisation.

@lzutao Thanks for your contribution here. Do you intend to do the stabilisation report etc.?

[tesuji]

I think it is a bit soon to stabilize this feature. It is about one month after the feature is merged and appeared on nightly.
But yeah, you could send a PR to propose stabilize this feature, but it should include real use cases.