linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] rust: time: Rename Delta's methods as_micros_ceil and as

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANiq72mBfTr0cdj_4Cpdk62h2k+Y5K3NSs54_1-9jiszMZ6AuA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2025 17:47:27 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
Cc: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>, a.hindborg@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, 
	ojeda@...nel.org, anna-maria@...utronix.de, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, 
	boqun.feng@...il.com, dakr@...nel.org, frederic@...nel.org, gary@...yguo.net, 
	jstultz@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lossin@...nel.org, 
	lyude@...hat.com, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, sboyd@...nel.org, 
	tglx@...utronix.de, tmgross@...ch.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] rust: time: Rename Delta's methods as_micros_ceil
 and as_millis

On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 3:17 PM Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> There are also methods such as Duration::as_millis(). Yes, those take
> &self but &self is equivalent to self for Copy types, so there is no
> difference. And even if we did treat them differently,
> Duration::as_millis() is actually borrowed->owned as the return type
> is not a reference, so ...

In most cases it may not matter, but even if taking either was exactly
the same, the point of the discussion(s) was what is more idiomatic,
i.e. how to spell those signatures.

I understand you are saying that `Duration::as_millis()` is already a
stable example from the standard library of something that is not
borrowed -> borrowed, and thus the guidelines should be understood as
implying it is fine either way. It is still confusing, as shown by
these repeated discussions, and on the parameter's side of things,
they still seem to prefer `&self`, including in the equivalent methods
of this patch.

Personally, I would use `self`, and clarify the guidelines.

Cheers,
Miguel