just open a second client

Unfortunately we have witnessed another example of how the folks involved in the Rust project allow a culture of “back channels” and “out groups”. The people involved in the highest level of leadership do not self-police in a productive fashion.

Why are people associated with The Rust Project’s leadership always so opaque about who is responsible? Why are we always hearing about one “individual” acting without the permission of “leadership”?

In order to have actual accountability of people’s actions, which JT suggests is the root of the sickness we are witnessing in the leadership teams you need to have courage to stand up to others. We need to condemn the actions of those who act outside their station. You need to have the courage to name and shame when required. In this case, the individual who messaged @rabidferret claiming to represent the consensus of the project should be ejected from their position of power. That is what accountability entails - consequences. I urge those still involved to stand up for what Rust is supposed to be about: openness, inclusivity, and respect.

the underlying principle of the context is that it is used to provide an isolated environment (or “context”, hence the name), in which your entire IR is living. This includes types, attributes, location, dialect, identifiers, and every operation that references these.

Create a builder with the given context.

If you have a reference &T, then normally in Rust the compiler performs optimizations based on the knowledge that &T points to immutable data. Mutating that data, for example through an alias or by transmuting an &T into an &mut T, is considered undefined behavior. UnsafeCell<T> opts-out of the immutability guarantee for &T: a shared reference &UnsafeCell<T> may point to data that is being mutated. This is called “interior mutability”.