Skip to content
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

Consider renaming Mutex<T> -> MutexCell<T> #18284

Closed
carllerche opened this issue Oct 24, 2014 · 5 comments
Closed

Consider renaming Mutex<T> -> MutexCell<T> #18284

carllerche opened this issue Oct 24, 2014 · 5 comments

Comments

@carllerche
Copy link
Member

This would mirror RefCell / UnsafeCell / Cell and allow non-cell mutexes to be used easier in the same module.

@carllerche carllerche changed the title Mutex<T> should be named MutexCell<T> Consider renaming Mutex<T> -> MutexCell<T> Oct 24, 2014
@reem
Copy link
Contributor

reem commented Oct 25, 2014

If the goal is to make raw::Mutex easier to use, than renaming it to RawMutex or using it as raw::Mutex instead of fully importing it might be better solutions. sync::Mutex is used much more often than raw::Mutex, and I would not want to make its name longer.

@huonw
Copy link
Member

huonw commented Oct 25, 2014

cc #14530, #15724

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

/cc @aturon

@reem
Copy link
Contributor

reem commented Feb 14, 2015

fwiw I've changed my mind here, I'm not totally for the renaming but I withdraw my objection.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

With the stabilization of these types I do not believe we are going to do this renaming.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants