-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Minor hash_map
doc adjustments + item attribute orderings
#77072
Conversation
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @withoutboats (or someone else) soon. If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
r? @jyn514 |
I'm not sure what benefit some of these changes bring ... highlighting things as codeblocks is definitely an improvement but the rest don't seem clearly better or worse to me. Anyway, I know nothing about libs (#77089 is proof) so r? @LukasKalbertodt for review or reassignment. |
@jyn514 Yeah... I figured that might be the case. Thanks for the feedback Edit: For clarification, the primary reason I'm suggesting re-ordering attibutes is for better consistency - in those cases, it was already 90%+ of the items that used that ordering (or much more, in the case of |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the PR! Seem like small useful improvements to me. Doc comments should certainly be the first "attribute" on items and my gut feeling agrees that often #[inline]
is above the stability attribute.
@bors r+ rollup=always |
📌 Commit 8a011b5 has been approved by |
…as-schievink Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#77072 (Minor `hash_map` doc adjustments + item attribute orderings) - rust-lang#77368 (Backport LLVM apfloat commit to rustc_apfloat) - rust-lang#77445 (BTreeMap: complete the compile-time test_variance test case) - rust-lang#77504 (Support vectors with fewer than 8 elements for simd_select_bitmask) - rust-lang#77513 (Change DocFragments from enum variant fields to structs with a nested enum) - rust-lang#77518 (Only use Fira Sans for the first `td` in item lists) - rust-lang#77521 (Move target feature whitelist from cg_llvm to cg_ssa) - rust-lang#77525 (Enable RenameReturnPlace MIR optimization on mir-opt-level >= 2) Failed merges: r? `@ghost`
@LukasKalbertodt Cool! Thank you :) |
This PR is really a couple visual changes glued together:
std::collections::hash_map
referenced the names of types without escaping their formatting (e.g. using "VacantEntry" instead of "VacantEntry
") - the ones I could find were changed to the latter#[feature(...)]
), so the few that had the other order were changed.#[feature]
attributes follow#[inline]
, so I swapped the two lines in places where that ordering was reversed. This is primarily a change based on stylistic continuity and aesthetics - I'm not sure how important that actually is / should be.I figured this would be pretty uncontroversial, but some of these might have been intentional for reasons I don't know about - if so, I'd be happy to remove the relevant changes. Of these, the final set of changes is probably the most unnecessary, so it also might be better to leave those out (in favor of reducing code churn).