All deprecation warnings have been converted to errors. This includes
the warning for multiple cfgs on one item. We'll leave that as an error
for some period of time to ensure that all uses are updated before the
behavior changes from "or" to "and".
All deprecation warnings have been converted to errors. This includes
the warning for multiple cfgs on one item. We'll leave that as an error
for some period of time to ensure that all uses are updated before the
behavior changes from "or" to "and".
The old version switched in between examples from the value `5i` to `"Hello"` and back.
Additionally, the code generated by `rustc print.rs --pretty=expanded` is not as verbose anymore.
Currently, the Guide says tuples "are only equivalent if the arity, types, and values are all identical", before presenting an example that uses `==` to compare two tuples whose arity and contained types match. This is misleading, because it implies that `==` can dynamically check whether two tuples have the same arity and contained types, whereas trying to do this would lead to a compiler error.
I tried to avoid destroying the flow of this section, but I'm not sure if I've been successful.
Because my '30 minute intro' was originally a blog post, the tone was a bit too light. It also was written a long time ago, and deserves a bit of a refresher for modern Rust. now that my work on the Guide is wrapping up, I want to give it a quick re-write as well.
This is not yet done, but I'm submitting it for feedback so far. I'd really like some comments on the ownership part in particular, which gets lower level than before, but is not strictly 100% accurate. Trying to strike a balance.
In general, I'm not sure I go into enough detail for those without systems experience, but am afraid of too much detail for those that do.
Rendered view: https://github.com/steveklabnik/rust/blob/intro_redux/src/doc/intro.md
/cc @wycats @nikomatsakis @brson etc
The old version switched in between examples from the value `5i` to `"Hello"`
and back. Additionally, the code generated by `rustc print.rs
--pretty=expanded` is not as verbose anymore.
Hi,
These are a few small edits to the Guide that I made while reading online. Really well done and approachable.
I have a few questions below, but I don't know if this is the proper place to ask them, so feel free to ignore the below.
1. Trailing commas seem to be a convention in Rust and are used quite a bit throughout the Guide, but are never explicitly mentioned. Maybe adding a short mention about them when they first appear in the Structs section might be helpful to those who are unfamiliar with or don't use them in other languages.
2. In the Iterators section, there is a block of code like this:
```rust
let mut range = range(0i, 10i);
loop {
match range.next() {
Some(x) => {
println!("{}", x);
} // no comma needed?
None => { break }
}
}
```
My inclination would be to put a comma where the comment is to separate the two arms to get this to compile, but it runs fine either way. Is there a convention on commas for scenarios like this where each arm is enclosed in `{}`?
All the best,
O-I
Oddly (to me), this code runs fine without the comma separating the `Some` and `None` arms of the `match` construct. It seems like Rust doesn't require you to separate arms with commas if all the expressions are enclosed in braces.
