{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreidd6wu44cx3bpeug2qegim7ui3cloyi6f44oq4myf3z3wfa76sxzq",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:ivbknywyskln22er3nkssdhl/app.bsky.feed.post/3mgb5hjzhk4a2"
  },
  "path": "/t/pre-rfc-deprecation-and-separation-of-the-dead-code-lint/24045#post_12",
  "publishedAt": "2026-03-03T23:22:38.000Z",
  "site": "https://internals.rust-lang.org",
  "textContent": "That's a fair point. I don't think `unused_items` covering all items was in the original proposal when I read it.\n\nThat addresses one of my concerns, and I think it is an improvement. But I think the churn caused by a deprecation here is not worth it. `dead_code` is very widely used. I don't think deprecation is necessary for improvement here though, to be clear.",
  "title": "Pre-RFC: Deprecation and separation of the dead_code lint"
}