Skip to content

static_mut_refs: Should the lint cover hidden references? #123060

Closed

Description

There is some discussion on #114447 (comment) about whether or not static_mut_refs should be triggering on code that takes references without using the & sigil, such as method calls.

This should probably be resolved soon if this is to be part of the edition. If this needs to change after the edition, the implementation will likely require separate code paths for the lint versus edition behavior, which could become confusing, or risk unintentional breakage.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

A-diagnosticsArea: Messages for errors, warnings, and lintsA-edition-2024Area: The 2024 editionT-langRelevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.disposition-mergeThis issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it.finished-final-comment-periodThe final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue.

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

Milestone

No milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions