Fix new Clippy lints #1511
Fix new Clippy lints #1511
Conversation
| @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ pub trait CryptoBlockRng: BlockRngCore {} | |||
| bound = "for<'x> R: Serialize + Deserialize<'x> + Sized, for<'x> R::Results: Serialize + Deserialize<'x>" | |||
| ) | |||
| )] | |||
| pub struct BlockRng<R: BlockRngCore + ?Sized> { | |||
| pub struct BlockRng<R: BlockRngCore> { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is changed because of the following warning:
warning: `?Sized` bound is ignored because of a `Sized` requirement
note: ...because `Deserialize` has the bound `Sized`
AFAIK we can not use this trait with DSTs either way, since we store core by value, so the ?Sized bound is not needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Rust does permit the last field of a struct to be unsized, but I can't see it being useful.
In this case we can drop the + Sized bound three lines up.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Rust does permit the last field of a struct to be unsized,
Huh, TIL. I guess it's not surprising I did not encounter it in practice since in its current form it's a virtually useless feature and even docs state that:
Yes, custom DSTs are a largely half-baked feature for now.
| @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ pub trait CryptoBlockRng: BlockRngCore {} | |||
| bound = "for<'x> R: Serialize + Deserialize<'x> + Sized, for<'x> R::Results: Serialize + Deserialize<'x>" | |||
| ) | |||
| )] | |||
| pub struct BlockRng<R: BlockRngCore + ?Sized> { | |||
| pub struct BlockRng<R: BlockRngCore> { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Rust does permit the last field of a struct to be unsized, but I can't see it being useful.
In this case we can drop the + Sized bound three lines up.
| impl<'a, T, D: Distribution<T> + ?Sized> Distribution<T> for &'a D { | ||
| impl<T, D: Distribution<T> + ?Sized> Distribution<T> for &D { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Clippy is pedantically complaining that we're being too pedantic?
(Sorry, I'll drop the sarcasm! This is fine.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Heh, to be fair, it's a good lint for raising awareness that such elision is allowed. As an "old-timer" who was using Rust since before 1.31, I automatically was using the "pedantic" style everywhere.
No description provided.