Fixes to guides #16438
Fixes to guides #16438
Conversation
| @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ explicitly with, respectively, `value as *const T` and `value as *mut T`). | |||
|
|
|||
| Going the opposite direction, from `*const` to a reference `&`, is not | |||
| safe. A `&T` is always valid, and so, at a minimum, the raw pointer | |||
| `*const T` has to be a valid to a valid instance of type `T`. Furthermore, | |||
| `*const T` has to be a pointer to a valid instance of type `T`. Furthermore, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe this could be reworded to just "has to point to a valid instance".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
···<date: 2014-08-11, Monday>···<from: Huon Wilson>···
@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ explicitly with, respectively,
value as *const Tandvalue as *mut T).Going the opposite direction, from
*constto a reference&, is not
safe. A&Tis always valid, and so, at a minimum, the raw pointer
-*const Thas to be a valid to a valid instance of typeT. Furthermore,
+*const Thas to be a pointer to a valid instance of typeT. Furthermore,Maybe this could be reworded to just "has to point to a valid instance".
I concur. What’s the rust-lang policy on these suggestions? Can
you send me a PR so I can include it, or do you prefer me to add
it myself?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You can just add it to your PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
···<date: 2014-08-12, Tuesday>···<from: Steve Klabnik>···
You can just add it to your PR.
Understood; done.
Following a suggestion by Huon Wilson.
Fixes wording in the *runtime*, *testing* and *unsafe* guides.
Fixes wording in the runtime, testing and unsafe guides.