Skip to content
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

Mention for in the section on loops #7001

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 8, 2013
Merged

Mention for in the section on loops #7001

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 8, 2013

Conversation

alco
Copy link
Contributor

@alco alco commented Jun 7, 2013

The "4.3 Loops" section only describes while and loop. We then see for
used in a code sample at the end of the "13. Vectors and strings" section,
but it's explained for the first time only in the next section --
"14. Closures".

It is worth mentioning it in "4.3 Loops".


Feel free to reword it and commit yourself if you don't like my wording.

@bstrie
Copy link
Contributor

bstrie commented Jun 7, 2013

This could actually be an important change in the face of #6997 , which would make for no longer simply sugar for higher-order functions.

Please change it to refer to for as a "construct" rather than a "loop", since it's so different from C's for and it's not necessarily a loop at all.

Also, "the C's" should become "C's".

The "4.3 Loops" section only describes `while` and `loop`. We then see `for`
used in a code sample at the end of the "13. Vectors and strings" section,
but it's explained for the first time only in the next section --
"14. Closures".

It is worth mentioning it in "4.3 Loops".
@alco
Copy link
Contributor Author

alco commented Jun 8, 2013

@bstrie I've applied your suggestions and amended the commit.

@bstrie
Copy link
Contributor

bstrie commented Jun 8, 2013

Thanks!

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2013
The "4.3 Loops" section only describes `while` and `loop`. We then see `for`
used in a code sample at the end of the "13. Vectors and strings" section,
but it's explained for the first time only in the next section --
"14. Closures".

It is worth mentioning it in "4.3 Loops".

---

Feel free to reword it and commit yourself if you don't like my wording.
@bors bors closed this Jun 8, 2013
@bors bors merged commit 83b68a2 into rust-lang:incoming Jun 8, 2013
flip1995 pushed a commit to flip1995/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2021
…Manishearth

Add non_octal_unix_permissions lint

fixes rust-lang#6934

changelog: add new lint that checks for non-octal values used to set unix file permissions
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants