From 1ad6442e919315144c476b522ed9a43579a319e5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yoav Lavi <yoavlavi122@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:59:38 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] update unnecessary_join documentation

---
 clippy_lints/src/methods/mod.rs | 7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/clippy_lints/src/methods/mod.rs b/clippy_lints/src/methods/mod.rs
index 021337280d1..b5a9af8c3bb 100644
--- a/clippy_lints/src/methods/mod.rs
+++ b/clippy_lints/src/methods/mod.rs
@@ -2055,7 +2055,7 @@ declare_clippy_lint! {
     /// Checks for use of `.collect::<Vec<String>>().join("")` on iterators.
     ///
     /// ### Why is this bad?
-    /// `.collect::<String>()` is more concise and usually more performant
+    /// `.collect::<String>()` is more concise and might be more performant
     ///
     /// ### Example
     /// ```rust
@@ -2070,9 +2070,12 @@ declare_clippy_lint! {
     /// println!("{}", output);
     /// ```
     /// ### Known problems
-    /// While `.collect::<String>()` is more performant in most cases, there are cases where
+    /// While `.collect::<String>()` is sometimes more performant, there are cases where
     /// using `.collect::<String>()` over `.collect::<Vec<String>>().join("")`
     /// will prevent loop unrolling and will result in a negative performance impact.
+    ///
+    /// Additionlly, differences have been observed between aarch64 and x86_64 assembly output,
+    /// with aarch64 tending to producing faster assembly in more cases when using `.collect::<String>()`
     #[clippy::version = "1.61.0"]
     pub UNNECESSARY_JOIN,
     pedantic,