From: Ralf Jung <post@ralfj.de>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 13:35:11 +0000 (+0200)
Subject: Merge pull request #40 from bzindovic/bzindovic-part06-typo-fix
X-Git-Url: https://git.ralfj.de/rust-101.git/commitdiff_plain/de20ea2de7cb19c2c379fcd61279e13da9c8193d?hp=9960465b9f5be770af699b69e4ebd580d8e6a3e4

Merge pull request #40 from bzindovic/bzindovic-part06-typo-fix

Fix a typo in part 6
---

diff --git a/src/part06.rs b/src/part06.rs
index 939fe08..4c7ee24 100644
--- 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); */