Making `MutexGuard`, `RwLockReadGuard` & `RwLockWriteGuard` more generic
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Markdown
- Stars
- 6.6k
- Forks
- 1.7k
- Avg merge
- 16h 14m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Currently, the locks guards are defined like this:
pub struct MutexGuard<'a, T: ?Sized + 'a> {
lock: &'a Mutex<T>,
poison: poison::Guard,
}
But there are a lot of instances where taking a reference to the lock is not as versatile as it could be, so perhaps a redefinition of the locks to something like this makes more sense.
pub struct OwnedMutexGuard<M: Deref<Target = Mutex<T>>, T: ?Sized> {
lock: M,
poison: poison::Guard,
}
pub type MutexGuard<'a, T> = OwnedMutexGuard<&'a Mutex<T>, T>
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No repository files or tests are named. Start by locating the current MutexGuard, RwLockReadGuard, and RwLockWriteGuard definitions and their construction and usage sites; determine whether generic owned guards and reference-based aliases can be designed consistently, then document the resolved API and compatibility behavior.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- operating-systems
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100