announce my ETH position :-))

[web.git] / ralf / _posts / 2017-06-09-mutexguard-sync.md

diff --git a/ralf/_posts/2017-06-09-mutexguard-sync.md b/ralf/_posts/2017-06-09-mutexguard-sync.md
index 456d289e7e9d2dda31397d975c71f9c7f2975474..8bfa21373c507ca5d76ac70eadf315bb3774dc2d 100644 (file)
--- a/ralf/_posts/2017-06-09-mutexguard-sync.md
+++ b/ralf/_posts/2017-06-09-mutexguard-sync.md
@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
 title: How MutexGuard was Sync When It Should Not Have Been
 categories: rust research
 reddit: /rust/comments/6gavfe/how_mutexguard_was_sync_when_it_should_not_have/
 title: How MutexGuard was Sync When It Should Not Have Been
 categories: rust research
 reddit: /rust/comments/6gavfe/how_mutexguard_was_sync_when_it_should_not_have/

+license: CC BY-SA 4.0
+license-url: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

 ---
 
 A couple of weeks ago, our ongoing effort to [formalize Rust's type system]({% post_url 2015-10-12-formalizing-rust %}) lead to us actually discovering a bug in the Rust standard library:
 ---
 
 A couple of weeks ago, our ongoing effort to [formalize Rust's type system]({% post_url 2015-10-12-formalizing-rust %}) lead to us actually discovering a bug in the Rust standard library:


@@ -129,3 +131,4 @@ However, I hope I convinced you that if we don't act, errors like the one descri
 That said, such decisions are of course going to go through the usual RFC process.
 It's certainly possible that someone comes up with a compromise that preserves some of the usefulness of auto traits, without putting safety at risk.
 
 That said, such decisions are of course going to go through the usual RFC process.
 It's certainly possible that someone comes up with a compromise that preserves some of the usefulness of auto traits, without putting safety at risk.
 

+#### Footnotes