Skip to content

Clarification of borrowck #354

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 29, 2022
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions src/borrow-splitting.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
# Splitting Borrows

The mutual exclusion property of mutable references can be very limiting when
working with a composite structure. The borrow checker understands some basic
stuff, but will fall over pretty easily. It does understand structs
sufficiently to know that it's possible to borrow disjoint fields of a struct
simultaneously. So this works today:
working with a composite structure. The borrow checker (a.k.a. borrowck)
understands some basic stuff, but will fall over pretty easily. It does
understand structs sufficiently to know that it's possible to borrow disjoint
fields of a struct simultaneously. So this works today:

```rust
struct Foo {
Expand Down