)]}'
{
  "commit": "08343b57072a3bdec6b5f72ddbdff20eda28ad2d",
  "tree": "a076690c3d4e0f46163e67021072c6b61650255a",
  "parents": [
    "bbe1afafb4661cc4ad44a836b4d33ec1ae5ee767",
    "83a7a4ad74ad6801706bbbc6c4e4d27b2e8dcfd6"
  ],
  "author": {
    "name": "Jonathan Brouwer",
    "email": "jonathantbrouwer@gmail.com",
    "time": "Sat Apr 04 17:19:09 2026 +0200"
  },
  "committer": {
    "name": "GitHub",
    "email": "noreply@github.com",
    "time": "Sat Apr 04 17:19:09 2026 +0200"
  },
  "message": "Rollup merge of #153555 - asder8215:rwlock_docs, r\u003dMark-Simulacrum\n\nClarified docs in std::sync::RwLock + added test to ensure that max reader count is respected\n\nThis addresses the issue with the [`std::sync::RwLock` docs](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/sync/struct.RwLock.html) in rust-lang/rust#115338. It centers around the following lines:\n\n\u003e An `RwLock` will allow any number of readers to acquire the lock as long as a writer is not holding the lock.\n\nIt\u0027s true that the `RwLock` in theory should allow any number of readers to acquire the lock when a writer is not holding it, but this may not be true in the implementation and could be os dependent. I decided to replace \"any number of readers\" to \"multiple\", so that it implies that more than 1 reader can acquire the lock, but you can\u0027t necessarily take away that this value is unbounded.\n\n@rustbot label +A-docs\n",
  "tree_diff": []
}