Update old uses of ~ in comments and debugging statements

2 files changed, 3 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/src/libsyntax/ext/deriving/generic/mod.rs b/src/libsyntax/ext/deriving/generic/mod.rs
index 339e535cdcd..eb6d0c0285f 100644
--- a/src/libsyntax/ext/deriving/generic/mod.rs
+++ b/src/libsyntax/ext/deriving/generic/mod.rs
@@ -896,8 +896,8 @@ impl<'a> MethodDef<'a> {
                                  nonself_args: &[P<Expr>])
         -> P<Expr> {
 
-        let mut raw_fields = Vec::new(); // ~[[fields of self],
-                                 // [fields of next Self arg], [etc]]
+        let mut raw_fields = Vec::new(); // Vec<[fields of self],
+                                 // [fields of next Self arg], [etc]>
         let mut patterns = Vec::new();
         for i in 0..self_args.len() {
             let struct_path= cx.path(DUMMY_SP, vec!( type_ident ));
diff --git a/src/libsyntax/ext/expand.rs b/src/libsyntax/ext/expand.rs
index 4ea2d4e5c68..b471e06492d 100644
--- a/src/libsyntax/ext/expand.rs
+++ b/src/libsyntax/ext/expand.rs
@@ -1691,7 +1691,7 @@ mod tests {
     // induced by visit.  Each of these arrays contains a list of indexes,
     // interpreted as the varrefs in the varref traversal that this binding
     // should match.  So, for instance, in a program with two bindings and
-    // three varrefs, the array ~[~[1,2],~[0]] would indicate that the first
+    // three varrefs, the array [[1, 2], [0]] would indicate that the first
     // binding should match the second two varrefs, and the second binding
     // should match the first varref.
     //