-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Move mutex_atomic
to restriction
#10115
Conversation
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @flip1995 (or someone else) soon. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
If this lint is moved to |
I have added a comment. I'm still not sure "shooting flies with cannons" is correct language for a formal issue description, but I didn't write it, and it's likely another PR's job to decide to replace it. |
@bors r+ Thanks! The description in the documentation LGTM. |
☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test |
By #4295, the general consensus seems to be that
mutex_atomic
is not a useful lint in most cases. If anything, it could be useful as a restriction on code that for whatever reason can't use atomics. Keeping it inclippy::nursery
is harmful to people attempting to use clippy for soundness.changelog: Moved [
mutex_atomic
] torestriction
#10115