From f79ba857dd1271ea8d5207121c2487621ebc23dd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Guillaume Gomez <guillaume1.gomez@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 22:25:58 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] clean up E0185 explanation

---
 src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md b/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md
index f0ad2af144a..ea29e2d4516 100644
--- a/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md
+++ b/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ An associated function for a trait was defined to be static, but an
 implementation of the trait declared the same function to be a method (i.e., to
 take a `self` parameter).
 
-Here's an example of this error:
+Erroneous code example:
 
 ```compile_fail,E0185
 trait Foo {
@@ -17,3 +17,19 @@ impl Foo for Bar {
     fn foo(&self) {}
 }
 ```
+
+When a type implements a trait's associated function, it has to use the same
+signature. So in this case, since `Foo::foo` doesn't take argument and doesn't
+return anything, its implementation on `Bar` should the same:
+
+```
+trait Foo {
+    fn foo();
+}
+
+struct Bar;
+
+impl Foo for Bar {
+    fn foo() {} // ok!
+}
+```

From c899f676733c8b7a732294ca7484c64ae3d6dddf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Guillaume Gomez <guillaume1.gomez@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 10:05:49 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Improve E0185 wording

---
 src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md b/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md
index ea29e2d4516..ac5d8bd766f 100644
--- a/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md
+++ b/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md
@@ -19,8 +19,8 @@ impl Foo for Bar {
 ```
 
 When a type implements a trait's associated function, it has to use the same
-signature. So in this case, since `Foo::foo` doesn't take argument and doesn't
-return anything, its implementation on `Bar` should the same:
+signature. So in this case, since `Foo::foo` doesn't take any argument and
+doesn't return anything, its implementation on `Bar` should be the same:
 
 ```
 trait Foo {

From 4fadb507f48a0f959518bbf9b7d0969a159d76f1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dylan DPC <dylan.dpc@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 23:56:00 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Update E0185.md

---
 src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md b/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md
index ac5d8bd766f..944a93ed14e 100644
--- a/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md
+++ b/src/librustc_error_codes/error_codes/E0185.md
@@ -19,8 +19,8 @@ impl Foo for Bar {
 ```
 
 When a type implements a trait's associated function, it has to use the same
-signature. So in this case, since `Foo::foo` doesn't take any argument and
-doesn't return anything, its implementation on `Bar` should be the same:
+signature. So in this case, since `Foo::foo` does not take any argument and
+does not return anything, its implementation on `Bar` should be the same:
 
 ```
 trait Foo {