We do not coerce &mut &mut T -> *mut mut T
#124692
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
4911a8c
to
a27c897
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
a27c897
to
e404e7a
Compare
compiler-errors
approved these changes
May 4, 2024
|
@bors r+ rollup |
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 4, 2024
…pointer-coercion-happens, r=compiler-errors We do not coerce `&mut &mut T -> *mut mut T` Resolves rust-lang#34117 by declaring it to be "working as intended" until someone RFCs it or whatever other lang proposal would be required. It seems a bit of a footgun, but perhaps there are strong reasons to allow it anyways. Seeing as how I often have to be mindful to not allow a pointer to coerce the wrong way in my FFI work, I am inclined to think not, but perhaps it's fine in some use-case and that's actually more common?
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 4, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#123356 (Reduce code size of `thread::set_current`) - rust-lang#124159 (Move thread parking to `sys::sync`) - rust-lang#124293 (Let miri and const eval execute intrinsics' fallback bodies) - rust-lang#124500 (lldb-formatters: Use StdSliceSyntheticProvider for &str) - rust-lang#124677 (Set non-leaf frame pointers on Fuchsia targets) - rust-lang#124692 (We do not coerce `&mut &mut T -> *mut mut T`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 4, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#123356 (Reduce code size of `thread::set_current`) - rust-lang#124159 (Move thread parking to `sys::sync`) - rust-lang#124293 (Let miri and const eval execute intrinsics' fallback bodies) - rust-lang#124677 (Set non-leaf frame pointers on Fuchsia targets) - rust-lang#124692 (We do not coerce `&mut &mut T -> *mut mut T`) - rust-lang#124698 (Rewrite `rustdoc-determinism` test in Rust) - rust-lang#124700 (Remove an unnecessary cast) - rust-lang#124701 (Docs: suggest `uN::checked_sub` instead of check-then-unchecked) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
This seems awfully specific as we generally don't coerce below references (coercions only apply top-level). But sure, why not 🤷 |
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 4, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#124692 - workingjubilee:document-no-double-pointer-coercion-happens, r=compiler-errors We do not coerce `&mut &mut T -> *mut mut T` Resolves rust-lang#34117 by declaring it to be "working as intended" until someone RFCs it or whatever other lang proposal would be required. It seems a bit of a footgun, but perhaps there are strong reasons to allow it anyways. Seeing as how I often have to be mindful to not allow a pointer to coerce the wrong way in my FFI work, I am inclined to think not, but perhaps it's fine in some use-case and that's actually more common?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Resolves #34117 by declaring it to be "working as intended" until someone RFCs it or whatever other lang proposal would be required. It seems a bit of a footgun, but perhaps there are strong reasons to allow it anyways. Seeing as how I often have to be mindful to not allow a pointer to coerce the wrong way in my FFI work, I am inclined to think not, but perhaps it's fine in some use-case and that's actually more common?