{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreidxebamx5kiuyndk5xwn2wes66nblmj4jdujbergsmyb5kdtbnp64",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:ivbknywyskln22er3nkssdhl/app.bsky.feed.post/3mh4spq6n4xb2"
  },
  "path": "/t/just-mut-alongside-let-mut/24084#post_7",
  "publishedAt": "2026-03-15T20:33:14.000Z",
  "site": "https://internals.rust-lang.org",
  "textContent": "nvijayap:\n\n> I am talking about the future - an enhancement to make the code elegant.\n\nThe core problem is that you're also, perhaps unknowingly, asking for\n\n  * a giant argument about when it's better to use which form\n  * a giant argument about whether everyone should have to move to the new form\n  * a giant argument about how rustfmt should decide which to use\n  * a bunch of confusion when people see older resources that weren't updated\n  * a ton of churn on everyone with existing code to move to the new thing\n\n\n\n_It's just not worth it_.\n\nThe rust philosophy for this is that it's fine to ask people to just accept the structured suggestion. I, for example, continually make the mistake of `struct Foo { x: u32; y: u32 }` -- a semicolon instead of a comma -- but the answer isn't \"Rust should accept that\"; it's \"oops, I accepted the structured suggestion and it's fine now\".",
  "title": "Just `mut` alongside `let mut`"
}