Libz blitz/use question mark instead of unwrap in examples

[muzikmoe]

Should resolve #129

[KodrAus]

Thanks @muzikmoe! I think we should only show the body of your new fallible methods in the docs, I've left an example of how we can do this.

You can also always run cargo doc --no-deps --open locally to quickly view the new docs you're working on.

[KodrAus]

Thanks @muzikmoe! I think we should only show the body of your new fallible methods in the docs, I've left an example of how we can do this.

You can also always run cargo doc --no-deps --open locally to quickly view the new docs you're working on.

[KodrAus]

I think we should hide the main function and signature of try_increment_patch so there's less noise in the examples. You can do this by adding a # at the start of a doc test line. Like:

//! # try_main() -> Result<(), Box<Error>> {
//! let mut bugfix_release = Version::parse("1.0.0")?;
//! ...
//! # Ok(())
//! # }
//! # fn main() { try_main().unwrap(); }

That way you only see the body of the try_main function, but the ? magically works.

[KodrAus]

This is a bit of a bit, but once we hide the method signatures in this example we'll need to remove this newline, otherwise the docs will have an empty line in them too.

[muzikmoe]

rebased.
check out #144