{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreibkxgye5lw5b3wk4ybwpwh4jhs7qg7i4sbbosxqb7ud4mzhgzv4oa",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:ivbknywyskln22er3nkssdhl/app.bsky.feed.post/3mfz4345p4sw2"
  },
  "path": "/t/pre-rfc-deprecation-and-separation-of-the-dead-code-lint/24045#post_4",
  "publishedAt": "2026-03-01T14:48:44.000Z",
  "site": "https://internals.rust-lang.org",
  "textContent": "I originally was gonna suggest that, but then it becomes significantly harder for new users, and old users and `dead_code` is used more rarely, to remember what lints are under it vs `unused`. Naming the lints as `dead_<item>` doesn't solve this because what's covered by `dead_code` is relatively arbitrary. The docs say items, but imports aren't and in most languages `dead_code` is `unreachable_code` or any unused code so its much less intuitive and DWIM for newcomers.",
  "title": "Pre-RFC: Deprecation and separation of the dead_code lint"
}