[to squash] remove some old doccomments from consensus_encoding
What changed, and why it matters
This commit only removes documentation comments and two unused extern crate declarations from a Rust source file. It does not change any executable code, logic, or security behavior.
No action needed; this is a benign documentation and cleanup commit.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The diff deletes a doccomment section about I/O and no-std handling, removes an allow lint directive, and removes conditional extern crate alloc and extern crate std declarations. These are non-functional cleanup changes in consensus_encoding/src/lib.rs.
Changed components
consensus_encoding/src/lib.rsInspect captured patch +0 / −17
diff --git a/consensus_encoding/src/lib.rs b/consensus_encoding/src/lib.rs
index aa0f6bf9..6ea4435f 100644
--- a/consensus_encoding/src/lib.rs
+++ b/consensus_encoding/src/lib.rs
@@ -5,15 +5,6 @@
//! This library provides traits that can be used to encode/decode objects in a
//! consensus-consistent way.
//!
-//! ## Notes on I/O
-//!
-//! I/O in Rust has a few problems in relation to no-std, as such we depend on the [`bitcoin-io`]
-//! crate and this library uses `io::Read` and `io::Write` to read and write respectively to readers
-//! and writers that are, to the best of our ability, interoperable with `std::io`. This includes
-//! error handling by way of the [`bitcoin_io::Error`].
-//!
-//! [bitcoin-io]: io
-//! [`bitcoin_io::Error`]: io::Error
#![no_std]
// Experimental features we need.
@@ -22,11 +13,3 @@
#![warn(missing_docs)]
#![warn(deprecated_in_future)]
#![doc(test(attr(warn(unused))))]
-// Exclude lints we don't think are valuable.
-#![allow(clippy::uninlined_format_args)] // Allow `format!("{}", x)`instead of enforcing `format!("{x}")`
-
-#[cfg(feature = "alloc")]
-extern crate alloc;
-
-#[cfg(feature = "std")]
-extern crate std;
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.