-//@ If you closely compare the `for` loop in `main` above, with the one in `part06::vec_min`, you will notice that we were able to write
-//@ `for e in v` earlier, but now we have to call `iter`. Why is that? Well, the `for` sugar is not actually tied to `Iterator`.
-//@ Instead, it demands an implementation of [`IntoIterator`](http://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/iter/trait.IntoIterator.html).
-//@ That's a trait of types that provide a *conversion* function into some kind of iterator. These conversion traits are a frequent
-//@ pattern in Rust: Rather than demanding that something is an iterator, or a string, or whatever; one demands that something
-//@ can be converted to an iterator/string/whatever. This provides convenience similar to overloading of functions: The function
-//@ can be called with lots of different types. By implementing such traits for your types, you can even make your own types
-//@ work smoothly with existing library functions. As usually for Rust, this abstraction comes at zero cost: If your data is already
-//@ of the right type, the conversion function will not do anything and trivially be optimized away.
+//@ If you closely compare the `for` loop in `main` above, with the one in `part06::vec_min`, you
+//@ will notice that we were able to write `for e in v` earlier, but now we have to call `iter`.
+//@ Why is that? Well, the `for` sugar is not actually tied to `Iterator`. Instead, it demands an
+//@ implementation of
+//@ [`IntoIterator`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/iter/trait.IntoIterator.html).
+//@ That's a trait of types that provide a *conversion* function into some kind of iterator. These
+//@ conversion traits are a frequent pattern in Rust: Rather than demanding that something is an
+//@ iterator, or a string, or whatever; one demands that something can be converted to an
+//@ iterator/string/whatever. This provides convenience similar to overloading of functions: The
+//@ function can be called with lots of different types.
+//@ By implementing such traits for your types, you can even make your own types work smoothly with
+//@ existing library functions. As usually for Rust, this abstraction comes at zero cost: If your
+//@ data is already of the right type, the conversion function will not do anything and trivially
+//@ be optimized away.