… r=sfacklerImplement total_cmp for f32, f64# Overview* Implements method `total_cmp` on `f32` and `f64`. This method implements a float comparison that, unlike the standard `partial_cmp`, is total (defined on all values) in accordance to the IEEE 754 (rev 2008) §5.10 `totalOrder` predicate.* The method has an API similar to `cmp`: `pub fn total_cmp(&self, other: &Self) -> crate::cmp::Ordering { ... }`.* Implements tests.* Has documentation.# Justification for the API* Total ordering for `f32` and `f64` has been discussed many time before:  *https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-pre-rfc-range-restricting-wrappers-for-floating-point-types/6701  *rust-lang/rfcs#1249  *rust-lang#53938  *rust-lang#5585* The lack of total ordering leads to frequent complaints, especially from people new to Rust.  * This is an ergonomics issue that needs to be addressed.  * However, the default behaviour of implementing only `PartialOrd` is intentional, as relaxing it might lead to correctness issues.* Most earlier implementations and discussions have been focusing on a wrapper type that implements trait `Ord`. Such a wrapper type is, however not easy to add because of the large API surface added.* As a minimal step that hopefully proves uncontroversial, we can implement a stand-alone method `total_cmp` on floating point types.  * I expect adding such methods should be uncontroversial because...    * Similar methods on `f32` and `f64` would be warranted even in case stdlib would provide a wrapper type that implements `Ord` some day.    * It implements functionality that is standardised. (IEEE 754, 2008 rev. §5.10 Note, that the 2019 revision relaxes the ordering. The way we do ordering in this method conforms to the stricter 2008 standard.)* With stdlib APIs such as `slice::sort_by` and `slice::binary_search_by` that allow users to provide a custom ordering criterion, providing additional helper methods is a minimal way of adding ordering functionality.  * Not also does it allow easily using aforementioned APIs, it also provides an easy and well-tested primitive for the users and library authors to implement an `Ord`-implementing wrapper, if needed.

… r=sfacklerImplement total_cmp for f32, f64# Overview* Implements method `total_cmp` on `f32` and `f64`. This method implements a float comparison that, unlike the standard `partial_cmp`, is total (defined on all values) in accordance to the IEEE 754 (rev 2008) §5.10 `totalOrder` predicate.* The method has an API similar to `cmp`: `pub fn total_cmp(&self, other: &Self) -> crate::cmp::Ordering { ... }`.* Implements tests.* Has documentation.# Justification for the API* Total ordering for `f32` and `f64` has been discussed many time before:  *https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-pre-rfc-range-restricting-wrappers-for-floating-point-types/6701  *rust-lang/rfcs#1249  *rust-lang#53938  *rust-lang#5585* The lack of total ordering leads to frequent complaints, especially from people new to Rust.  * This is an ergonomics issue that needs to be addressed.  * However, the default behaviour of implementing only `PartialOrd` is intentional, as relaxing it might lead to correctness issues.* Most earlier implementations and discussions have been focusing on a wrapper type that implements trait `Ord`. Such a wrapper type is, however not easy to add because of the large API surface added.* As a minimal step that hopefully proves uncontroversial, we can implement a stand-alone method `total_cmp` on floating point types.  * I expect adding such methods should be uncontroversial because...    * Similar methods on `f32` and `f64` would be warranted even in case stdlib would provide a wrapper type that implements `Ord` some day.    * It implements functionality that is standardised. (IEEE 754, 2008 rev. §5.10 Note, that the 2019 revision relaxes the ordering. The way we do ordering in this method conforms to the stricter 2008 standard.)* With stdlib APIs such as `slice::sort_by` and `slice::binary_search_by` that allow users to provide a custom ordering criterion, providing additional helper methods is a minimal way of adding ordering functionality.  * Not also does it allow easily using aforementioned APIs, it also provides an easy and well-tested primitive for the users and library authors to implement an `Ord`-implementing wrapper, if needed.

… r=sfacklerImplement total_cmp for f32, f64# Overview* Implements method `total_cmp` on `f32` and `f64`. This method implements a float comparison that, unlike the standard `partial_cmp`, is total (defined on all values) in accordance to the IEEE 754 (rev 2008) §5.10 `totalOrder` predicate.* The method has an API similar to `cmp`: `pub fn total_cmp(&self, other: &Self) -> crate::cmp::Ordering { ... }`.* Implements tests.* Has documentation.# Justification for the API* Total ordering for `f32` and `f64` has been discussed many time before:  *https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-pre-rfc-range-restricting-wrappers-for-floating-point-types/6701  *rust-lang/rfcs#1249  *rust-lang#53938  *rust-lang#5585* The lack of total ordering leads to frequent complaints, especially from people new to Rust.  * This is an ergonomics issue that needs to be addressed.  * However, the default behaviour of implementing only `PartialOrd` is intentional, as relaxing it might lead to correctness issues.* Most earlier implementations and discussions have been focusing on a wrapper type that implements trait `Ord`. Such a wrapper type is, however not easy to add because of the large API surface added.* As a minimal step that hopefully proves uncontroversial, we can implement a stand-alone method `total_cmp` on floating point types.  * I expect adding such methods should be uncontroversial because...    * Similar methods on `f32` and `f64` would be warranted even in case stdlib would provide a wrapper type that implements `Ord` some day.    * It implements functionality that is standardised. (IEEE 754, 2008 rev. §5.10 Note, that the 2019 revision relaxes the ordering. The way we do ordering in this method conforms to the stricter 2008 standard.)* With stdlib APIs such as `slice::sort_by` and `slice::binary_search_by` that allow users to provide a custom ordering criterion, providing additional helper methods is a minimal way of adding ordering functionality.  * Not also does it allow easily using aforementioned APIs, it also provides an easy and well-tested primitive for the users and library authors to implement an `Ord`-implementing wrapper, if needed.

Rollup of 9 pull requestsSuccessful merges: -rust-lang#72310 (Add Peekable::next_if) -rust-lang#72383 (Suggest using std::mem::drop function instead of explicit destructor call) -rust-lang#72398 (SocketAddr and friends now correctly pad its content) -rust-lang#72465 (Warn about unused captured variables) -rust-lang#72568 (Implement total_cmp for f32, f64) -rust-lang#72572 (Add some regression tests) -rust-lang#72591 (librustc_middle: Rename upvar_list to closure_captures) -rust-lang#72701 (Fix grammar in liballoc raw_vec) -rust-lang#72731 (Add missing empty line in E0619 explanation)Failed merges:r?@ghost

…r=Mark-SimulacrumRun standard library unit tests without optimizations in `nopt` CI jobsThis was discussed inrust-lang#73288 as a way to catch similar issues in the future. This builds an unoptimized standard library with the bootstrap compiler and runs the unit tests. This takes about 2 minutes on my laptop.I confirmed that this method works locally, although there may be a better way of implementing it. It would be better to use the stage 2 compiler instead of the bootstrap one.Notably, there are currently four `libstd` unit tests that fail in debug mode on `i686-unkown-linux-gnu` (a tier one target):```failures:    f32::tests::test_float_bits_conv    f32::tests::test_total_cmp    f64::tests::test_float_bits_conv    f64::tests::test_total_cmp```These are the tests that promptedrust-lang#73288 as well as the ones added inrust-lang#72568, which is currently broken due torust-lang#73328.