(minor) amendments to Mutex docs #3645
Merged
Conversation
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
To be more correct about fact that std Mutex can also be held across _some_ .await points
Darksonn
reviewed
Mar 25, 2021
Darksonn
added
A-tokio
Minor edits for improved readability. Introduced an extra paragraph under 'Which kind of mutex should you use?' explicitly warning against holding std Mutex across .await points even though it's possible in some situations.
Darksonn
reviewed
Mar 26, 2021
Contributor
Darksonn
left a comment
Darksonn
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, the new edits are much better!
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Motivation
The opening lines of the current documentation for tokio::sync::Mutex could be interpreted to imply
std::sync::Mutexcannot be held across any.awaitpoints, which isn't the case.Solution
Attempted to keep reasonably concise but allude to fact that not all
.awaitpoints are equal in terms of bounds required.