Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: b9aa6e5f50
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| #![allow(clippy::indexing_slicing)] | ||
| #![allow(missing_docs)] | ||
| // Expect indexing in examples for simplicity | ||
| #![expect(missing_docs, reason = "examples/benches/tests omit docs by design")] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Drop missing_docs expect for non-public example
This example crate has no public items, so missing_docs never fires. With #![expect(missing_docs)] the compiler emits an unfulfilled-lint-expectations warning, and the required cargo clippy --all-targets -- -D warnings will fail for this target. Consider removing the expect here or adding a documented public item if you really want a missing_docs expectation.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| #[derive(Clone, PartialEq, ::prost::Message)] | ||
| pub struct Ciphertext { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Restore suppression for prost PartialEq lint
These prost-generated structs derive PartialEq but not Eq, which triggers Clippy’s derive_partial_eq_without_eq lint. The removed #[allow(clippy::derive_partial_eq_without_eq)] means cargo clippy --all-targets -- -D warnings now fails on this module unless Eq is derived or the lint is re-suppressed.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
No description provided.