Code change:
} } <del> macro_rules! range_impl { </del> <ins> macro_rules! range_exact_iter_impl { </ins> ($($t:ty)*) => ($( #[stable(feature = "rust1", since = "1.0.0")] <del> impl Iterator for ::ops::Range<$t> { type Item = $t; </del> <ins> impl ExactSizeIterator for ::ops::Range<$t> { </ins> #[inline] <del> fn next(&mut self) -> Option<$t> { if self.start < self.end { let result = self.start; self.start += 1; return Some(result); } return None; } #[inline] fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) { </del> <ins> fn len(&self) -> usize { </ins> debug_assert!(self.end >= self.start); <del> let hint = (self.end - self.start) as usize; (hint, Some(hint)) </del> <ins> (self.end - self.start) as usize </ins> } } <del> #[stable(feature = "rust1", since = "1.0.0")] impl ExactSizeIterator for ::ops::Range<$t> {} </del> )*) } <del> macro_rules! range_impl_no_hint { ($($t:ty)*) => ($( #[stable(feature = "rust1", since = "1.0.0")] impl Iterator for ::ops::Range<$t> { type Item = $t; #[inline] fn next(&mut self) -> Option<$t> { if self.start < self.end { let result = self.start; self.start += 1; return Some(result); } </del> <ins> #[stable(feature = "rust1", since = "1.0.0")] impl<A: Int> Iterator for ::ops::Range<A> { type Item = A; </ins> <del> return None; } </del> <ins> #[inline] fn next(&mut self) -> Option<A> { if self.start < self.end { let result = self.start; self.start = self.start + Int::one(); Some(result) } else { None </ins> } <del> )*) } macro_rules! range_other_impls { ($($t:ty)*) => ($( #[stable(feature = "rust1", since = "1.0.0")] impl DoubleEndedIterator for ::ops::Range<$t> { #[inline] fn next_back(&mut self) -> Option<$t> { if self.start < self.end { self.end -= 1; return Some(self.end); } </del> <ins> } </ins> <del> return None; } } </del> <ins> #[inline] fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) { debug_assert!(self.end >= self.start); let hint = (self.end - self.start).to_uint(); (hint.unwrap_or(0), hint) } } </ins> <del> #[stable(feature = "rust1", since = "1.0.0")] impl Iterator for ::ops::RangeFrom<$t> { type Item = $t; </del> <ins> range_exact_iter_impl!(usize u8 u16 u32 isize i8 i16 i32); #[cfg(target_pointer_width = "64")] range_exact_iter_impl!(u64 i64); </ins> <del> #[inline] fn next(&mut self) -> Option<$t> { let result = self.start; self.start += 1; debug_assert!(result < self.start); return Some(result); } </del> <ins> #[stable(feature = "rust1", since = "1.0.0")] impl<A: Int> DoubleEndedIterator for ::ops::Range<A> { #[inline] fn next_back(&mut self) -> Option<A> { if self.start < self.end { self.end = self.end - Int::one(); Some(self.end) } else { None </ins> } <del> )*) </del> <ins> } </ins> } <del> range_impl!(usize u8 u16 u32 isize i8 i16 i32); #[cfg(target_pointer_width = "64")] range_impl!(u64 i64); #[cfg(target_pointer_width = "32")] range_impl_no_hint!(u64 i64); </del> <ins> #[stable(feature = "rust1", since = "1.0.0")] impl<A: Int> Iterator for ::ops::RangeFrom<A> { type Item = A; </ins> <del> range_other_impls!(usize u8 u16 u32 u64 isize i8 i16 i32 i64); </del> <ins> #[inline] fn next(&mut self) -> Option<A> { let result = self.start; self.start = self.start + Int::one(); debug_assert!(result < self.start); Some(result) } } </ins> /// An iterator that repeats an element endlessly #[derive(Clone)]

Related discussion:
text: This code compiled fine before 1.0.0-nightly ( 2015-01-23 16:08:14 +0000): But with that version, it now gives this error:
changing to should work, I stumbled upon the same thing and the doc seems to be updated: (see at the very bottom) EDIT: Maybe worth noting that these work:
That's just a workaround to a bug (not sure if that was implied). should fall back to being as per the existence of the integer fallback.
I don't necessarily expect this to work. Fallback comes late in the process, once all constraints are known, but (like method dispatch) requires the type being cast to be known immediately.
It's plausible we could make it work since we know that the type is integral (I imagine that's how it ever worked, not sure what would have changed that, though it might have been something I did). It occurs to me though that this is somewhat forward-hostile to the idea of integer literals ever being used for anything other than plain ints (but enabling such a feature may well wind up requiring opt-in anyway).
(Though really it's sort of silly that requires the type to be known immediately, so I guess fixing that would be another way to ease the forward compat fears.)
I thought this was a feature because it's saying that it doesn't know if it's or for example. Would it assume it's signed only if it contains negative numbers in the range? EDIT3: what said makes sense: EDIT2: ignore the following, my bad But I might be missing something because this doesn't output anything from : EDIT: just realized -1u32 is too big so the following makes sense: There's no output from , unless using