| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
Fixes #35653
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-www/pull/621
|
|
|
|
Stabilize `..` in tuple (struct) patterns
I'd like to nominate `..` in tuple and tuple struct patterns for stabilization.
This feature is a relatively small extension to existing stable functionality and doesn't have known blockers.
The feature first appeared in Rust 1.10 6 months ago.
An example of use: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/36203
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33627
r? @nikomatsakis
|
|
Add example using Self to reference
When I first came across `Self` I had a hard time finding references to it in the docs (and it's also been asked about on [StackOverflow](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/32304595/whats-the-difference-between-self-and-self).
I hope this example provides someone who comes across it for the first time a little more help. If there is a better way to show an example actually using `Self`, I'm happy to modify this. It was just the simplest place to start I could see.
|
|
|
|
Fix some mistakes in HRTB docs
The example code for higher-ranked trait bounds on closures had an unnecessary `mut` which was confusing, and the text referred to an mutable reference which does not exist in the code (and isn't needed). Removed the `mut`s and fixed the text to better describe the actual error for the failing example.
Thanks to csd_ on IRC for pointing out these problems!
r? @steveklabnik
|
|
|
|
Commented out final 'main' function in order to fit within pattern of…
… other examples and prevent incorrect indentation
|
|
Don't mention "*" dependency version in guessing game example
It's a bad practice as far [RFC 1241](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1241-no-wildcard-deps.md) is concerned, and introducing it in early tutorial may as well make it feel legitimate.
|
|
in the Closures section
|
|
examples and prevent incorrect indentation
|
|
It's a bad practice as far [RFC 1241] is concerned, and introducing it
in early tutorial may as well make it feel legitimate.
[RFC 1241]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1241-no-wildcard-deps.md
|
|
I followed the "Testing" chapter using Rust 1.12.1 but there are some differences. By default the `tests` module is now also generated by `cargo new`, and the console output is updated.
|
|
Prohibit patterns in trait methods without bodies
They are not properly type checked
```rust
trait Tr {
fn f(&a: u8); // <- This compiles
}
```
, mostly rejected by the parser already and generally don't make much sense.
This PR is kind of a missing part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/35015.
Given the [statistics from crater](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/37378#issuecomment-256154994), the effect of this PR is mostly equivalent to improving `unused_mut` lint.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/35078#issuecomment-255707355 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/35015 https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1685 https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/35203
r? @eddyb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fix a error of 'book/deref-coercions.html'
The original sentence is:
> This example has two conversions: `Rc<String>` to `String` and then `String` to `&str`.
But it should be
> This example has two conversions: `Rc<String>` to `String` and then `String` to `str`.
or
> This example has two conversions: `&Rc<String>` to `&String` and then `&String` to `&str`.
I think the latter is more clearly.
r? @steveklabnik
|
|
|
|
|
|
The example code for higher-ranked trait bounds on closures had an
unnecessary `mut` which was confusing, and the text referred to an
mutable reference which does not exist in the code (and isn't needed).
Removed the `mut`s and fixed the text to better describe the actual
error for the failing example.
|
|
Remove un-rendered ticks from "const and static" doc title
Related to #37116 and #37119.
Ticks in the titles are not correctly rendered
|
|
The original sentence is:
> This example has two conversions: `Rc<String>` to `String` and then `String` to `&str`.
But it should be
> This example has two conversions: `Rc<String>` to `String` and then `String` to `str`.
or
> This example has two conversions: `&Rc<String>` to `&String` and then `&String` to `&str`.
I think the latter is more clearly.
|
|
|
|
The main change is to stop using javascript to generate the URLs and use
rustdoc instead.
This also adds run buttons to the error index examples.
|
|
book: remove backticks in Type Aliases header
Fix #37116.
|
|
Explain motivation behind lifetimes
Start the lifetime section with an explanation of the issues that lack of explicit lifetimes cause and how the explicit lifetimes solve these.
----------------
I had really hard time figuring out why I would need to care about the explicit reference lifetimes when going through the book at first. With strong background in C++, I'm familiar with the dangling reference problem - but given the section seems to focus more on the lifetime syntax and various ways to define lifetimes on functions and structs, I was unable to understand how they are used to solve the reference problem.
This PR is an attempt at getting the reader to understand what the explicit lifetimes are used for and why they are an awesome thing instead of a bit of syntax that just has to be written.
It's been less than a week that I've been diving into Rust so I'm far from certain about the terminology and technical correctness. I tried mimicking the existing terminology from the lifetimes section, but still no promises on getting it right.
|
|
Start the lifetime section with an explanation of the issues that
lack of explicit lifetimes cause and how lifetimes alleviate these.
|
|
stabilise ?, attributes on stmts, deprecate Reflect
r? @nikomatsakis
|
|
Fix #37116.
|
|
Note that attributes on expressions are still unstable and are behind the `stmt_expr_attributes` flag.
cc [Tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15701)
|
|
Book: Be very explicit of lifetimes being descriptive
... not prescriptive. Pointed out in https://users.rust-lang.org/t/what-if-i-get-lifetimes-wrong/7535/4, which was a revelation to me and made me think this should be more clear in the book. I'm not sure if I got this entirely right or if the wording is good, but I figured a PR is more helpful than a simple issue.
r? @steveklabnik
Small Note: There's also https://github.com/rust-lang/book, should I have sent the PR there? It doesn't coincide with the online book though, so I figured it's better of here.
|
|
reference: use ticks instead of quotes
|
|
Reference: Mention `move` keyword for lambdas
From issue #36683
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minor modifications in concurrency section of the Rust book
Fixes #36939
r? @steveklabnik
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also, emphasize differently.
|
|
... no prescriptive. Pointed out in https://users.rust-lang.org/t/what-if-i-get-lifetimes-wrong/7535/4, which was a revelation to me and made me think this should be more clear in the book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
As it stands, getting-started and guessing-game both introduce `run` as
a new command. The second should probably make it clear that the reader
has seen it before :)
|
|
Add `Send` and `Sync` traits to the reference
Fixes #36859
|
|
Suggesting a change to a comment that puzzled me
While reading this, the comment made it difficult for me to simply absorb the concept. It interrupted my reading flow, and I think this expresses the same meaning, but reads a bit better. It's trivial, but makes it easier for me to move on to the next line.
|
|
Fixes #36859
|
|
Add docs for "!" Never type (rfc 1216)
Pull Request: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1216
Tracking Issue: #35121
|
|
doc: Fix minor typo in book/variable-bindings.md
r? @steveklabnik
|
