Closed
Conversation
RFC #2585 has been updated to be an optional lint for now. We clearly want this
behavior, so use this lint for our code. While here, also enable some other
lints that sound useful.
We are actually missing a couple of unsafe{} blocks in unsafe functions, so
follow-up commits are needed to properly document the safety assumptions around
these.
See: rust-lang/rfcs#2585 (comment)
See: rust-lang/rust#71668
Owner
Author
|
unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn will come with an update to Rust edition 2024. |
michaellass
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 25, 2025
This also addresses #4 since unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn is now the default.
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
RFC #2585 has been updated to be an optional lint for now. We clearly want this
behavior, so use this lint for our code. While here, also enable some other
lints that sound useful.
We are actually missing a couple of unsafe{} blocks in unsafe functions, so
follow-up commits are needed to properly document the safety assumptions around
these.
See: rust-lang/rfcs#2585 (comment)
See: rust-lang/rust#71668