Make working with unsafe pointers easier #10429
Comments
|
Closing in favor of an RFC issue: rust-lang/rfcs#433 |
flip1995
pushed a commit
to flip1995/rust
that referenced
this issue
Jun 2, 2023
new lint: `missing_fields_in_debug` Fixes rust-lang#10429 This PR adds a new lint that looks for manual `Debug` implementations that do not "use" all of the fields. This often happens when adding a new field to a struct. It also acts as a style lint in case leaving out a field was intentional. In that case, it's preferred to use [`DebugStruct::finish_non_exhaustive`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/fmt/struct.DebugStruct.html#method.finish_non_exhaustive), which indicates that there are more fields that were explicitly not shown. ``` changelog: [`missing_fields_in_debug`]: missing fields in manual `Debug` implementation ```
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
There are a number of common tricks to writing unsafe Rust that tend to be just passed around as received wisdom, but it's not particularly easy or obvious. For some use cases using unsafe pointers is just easier, so we should cater to this with nicer library functions. This is an open-ended task to identify common unsafe patterns and extract them into the standard library. The only things I have in mind off hand are
allocandfreefunctions to encapsulate the transmutes from unique pointers.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: