News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rust 1.62.0 by jcelerier on Thursday June 30, 2022 @05:00PM (#31938549)
> I am finding it far more likely that it is correct when the compiler is happy with it,

it's pretty interesting though - surely you would have flagged the equivalent C++ code to what is discussed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93740, if my understanding is correct - akin to std::unique_ptr<pthread_mutex_t>, as obviously wrong ? It's a pattern that was apparently commonplace in rust until now yet I would definitely not let my first year comp. sci. interns get away with something like this during code review.

Re:Rust 1.62.0 by staticassertion on Thursday June 30, 2022 @09:05PM (#31940828)
I think I would really enjoy reading you explain what's obviously wrong about that.
Re:Rust 1.62.0 by tialaramex on Thursday June 30, 2022 @06:44PM (#31939651)
What about it is "obviously wrong" ? Did you mean here, "Not performing as well as I'd like" ?