From 159f48cdc287047b06bd97751b22a5a423d6945e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nadrieril Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 20:14:38 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Don't mention function pointers See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/71930#discussion_r426762889 --- src/librustc_mir_build/hair/pattern/_match.rs | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/librustc_mir_build/hair/pattern/_match.rs b/src/librustc_mir_build/hair/pattern/_match.rs index d08319e8327..16d783fcad2 100644 --- a/src/librustc_mir_build/hair/pattern/_match.rs +++ b/src/librustc_mir_build/hair/pattern/_match.rs @@ -64,9 +64,9 @@ /// (`Constructor`, `Fields`) pairs, handling all the special cases correctly. /// /// Caveat: this constructors/fields distinction doesn't quite cover every Rust value. For example -/// a value of type `Rc` doesn't fit this idea very well, nor do function pointers and various -/// other things. However, the idea covers everything that can be pattern-matched, and this is all -/// we need for exhaustiveness checking. +/// a value of type `Rc` doesn't fit this idea very well, nor do various other things. +/// However, this idea covers everything that can be pattern-matched, and this is all we need for +/// exhaustiveness checking. /// /// /// # Algorithm