Re: [PATCH] rust: arc: remove unused PhantomData

From: Alice Ryhl
Date: Thu Nov 07 2024 - 02:56:31 EST


On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 10:13 PM Tamir Duberstein <tamird@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 2:20 PM Miguel Ojeda
> <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 5:33 PM Tamir Duberstein <tamird@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > I would be happy to add the relevant details to the commit message but
> > > this is one citation that I haven't been able to locate. The closest
> > > mention I could find[0] only vaguely mentions that this change was
> > > made, but does not reference a commit (and certainly not an RFC).
> >
> > In Boqun's first link, there is a reference to the nomicon with
> > details, and the section:
> >
> > https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/phantom-data.html#generic-parameters-and-drop-checking
> >
> > explains the change, including:
> >
> > "But ever since RFC 1238, this is no longer true nor necessary."
> >
> > There was another RFC (1327) after that, for a finer-grained approach
> > (`may_dangle`). The name of the feature gate was also changed.
> >
> > Anyway, I don't think we need to add any of that to the commit message
> > though. Perhaps linking the latest RFC is good for context, so if you
> > think it is a good idea, of course please go for it -- but in case you
> > are referring to what I said, I didn't say that we should add the RFC
> > bits into the commit message.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Miguel
>
> Thanks a lot for all the hand-holding here. I think the sensible thing
> to do here is to add a comment rather than remove the PhantomData.
> I'll send that as v2 shortly if no-one objects.

Adding a comment and keeping PhantomData SGTM.

Alice