{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreigicjoaxrcm3ceaf3kqn4taajtajbj5wemxoztdpwpvhgluloubcq",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:ivbknywyskln22er3nkssdhl/app.bsky.feed.post/3mfq5a45xzym2"
  },
  "path": "/t/method-auto-de-ref-and-lack-of-it-in-rfc-132-ufcs/24005#post_11",
  "publishedAt": "2026-02-26T00:41:40.000Z",
  "site": "https://internals.rust-lang.org",
  "textContent": "quinedot:\n\n> Taking these together, do you mean:\n\nThat is an accurate description of the potential changes. As you note, together they produce an undesirable result. But to be clear, while I do claim I _could_ support either change, I'm undecided on whether I think they're worth making. They each imply an incompatible statement about how the ownership semantics work, so both will break _someone's_ mental model.",
  "title": "Method auto-(de)ref (and lack of it) in RFC 132 ufcs"
}