Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
punctuation in parens
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
Manishearth committed Jan 7, 2024
1 parent 68bdedd commit 6553d0d
Showing 1 changed file with 2 additions and 2 deletions.
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions library/core/src/pin.rs
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -714,7 +714,7 @@
//! return [`&mut Field`] or <code>[Pin]<[`&mut Field`]></code>? This question also arises with
//! `enum`s and wrapper types like [`Vec<T>`], [`Box<T>`], and [`RefCell<T>`]. (This question
//! applies just as well to shared references, but we'll examine the more common case of mutable
//! references for illustration).
//! references for illustration)
//!
//! It turns out that it's up to the author of `Struct` to decide which type the "projection"
//! should produce. The choice must be *consistent* though: if a pin is projected to a field
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -792,7 +792,7 @@
//! structural pinning to an inner field of `T`, which may not be [`Unpin`]! (Adding *any*
//! projection operation requires unsafe code, so the fact that [`Unpin`] is a safe trait does
//! not break the principle that you only have to worry about any of this if you use
//! [`unsafe`].)
//! [`unsafe`])
//!
//! 2. *Pinned Destruction.* As discussed [above][drop-impl], [`drop`] takes
//! [`&mut self`], but the struct (and hence its fields) might have been pinned
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 6553d0d

Please sign in to comment.