refactor: use Option<&mut T>
instead of &mut Option<T>
in a few places
#4702
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is generally a good practice, as it makes some APIs less awkward to call (in particular, callers don't have to pass
&mut None
when they're not interested in the optional value).There are a few other instances of this in the code base, but after spending a few minutes trying to move them to
Option<&mut>
, turns out I couldn't:&mut Option
with a newOption
value.&mut Option
pass it multiple times, and strangely i can't clone aOption<&mut T>
; I suspect the mutability makes it impossible, because it would be another live mutable alias to the inner value.