alt Hacker News> If a mutex has been poisoned, then something must have already panicked, likely in some other thread, so you're already in trouble at that point.
I find that in the majority of cases you're essentially dealing with one of two cases:
1) Your critical sections are tiny and you know you can't panic, in which case dealing with poisoning is just useless busywork.
2) You use a Mutex to get around Rust's "shared xor mutable" requirement. That is, you just want to temporarily grab a mutable reference and modify an object, but you don't have any particular atomicity requirements. In this case panicking is no different than if you would panic on a single thread while modifying an object through a plain old `&mut`. Here too dealing with poisoning is just useless busywork.
> I'd want a panic in one thread to cascade into stopping the program as soon as possible.
Sure, but you don't need mutex poisoning for this.
> 1) Your critical sections are tiny and you know you can't panic, in which case dealing with poisoning is just useless busywork.
Many people underestimate how many things can panic in corner cases. I've found quite a few unsafe functions in various crates that were unsound due to integer-overflow panics that the author hadn't noticed. Knowing for a fact that your operation cannot panic is the exception rather than the rule, and while it's unfortunate that the std Mutex doesn't accomodate non-poisoning mutexes, I see poisoning as a reasonable default.
(If Mutex::lock() unwrapped the error automatically, then very few people would even think about the "useless busywork" of the poison bit. For a similar example, the future types generated for async functions contain panic statements in case they are polled after completion, and no one complains about those.)
> 2) You use a Mutex to get around Rust's "shared xor mutable" requirement. That is, you just want to temporarily grab a mutable reference and modify an object, but you don't have any particular atomicity requirements.
Then I'd stick to a RefCell. Unless it's a static variable in a single-threaded program, in which case I usually just write some short wrapper functions if I find the manipulation too tedious.