Merge pull request #42 from zdyxry/master

[rust-101.git] / src / part06.rs

diff --git a/src/part06.rs b/src/part06.rs
index 21fe644758fc7813a7a7cae1b53698005bbcb1b2..4c7ee24fdeedfab73af6b88b05df989b37623297 100644 (file)
--- a/src/part06.rs
+++ b/src/part06.rs
@@ -127,8 +127,8 @@ fn head<T>(v: &Vec<T>) -> Option<&T> {
 //@ have aliasing (of `first` and `v`) and mutation. But this time, the bug is hidden behind the
 //@ call to `head`. How does Rust solve this? If we translate the code above to Rust, it doesn't
 //@ compile, so clearly we are good - but how and why?
-//@ (Notice that have to explicitly assert using //@ `unwrap` that `first` is not `None`, whereas
-//@ the C++ code above would silently dereference a //@ `NULL`-pointer. But that's another point.)
+//@ (Notice that we use `unwrap` to explicitly assert that `first` is not `None`, whereas
+//@ the C++ code above would silently dereference a `NULL`-pointer. But that's another point.)
 fn rust_foo(mut v: Vec<i32>) -> i32 {
     let first: Option<&i32> = head(&v);
     /* v.push(42); */
@@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ fn rust_foo(mut v: Vec<i32>) -> i32 {
 //@ application code. Most of the time, we don't have to explicitly add lifetimes to function
 //@ types. This is thanks to *lifetime elision*, where Rust will automatically insert lifetimes we
 //@ did not specify, following some simple, well-documented
-//@ [rules](https://doc.rust- lang.org/stable/book/lifetimes.html#lifetime-elision).
+//@ [rules](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/book/lifetimes.html#lifetime-elision).
 
 //@ [index](main.html) | [previous](part05.html) | [raw source](workspace/src/part06.rs) |
 //@ [next](part07.html)