Skip to content

Add f32 and f64 examples warning #31918

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 27, 2016
Merged

Add f32 and f64 examples warning #31918

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 27, 2016

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Contributor

So, you put it this way because the examples are kinda random, right? Would it be better to pick one, and make all examples use it, and then only need the disclaimer for one of them? I'm not sure.

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

I found it better this way because as long as examples are common for f32 and f64, people should be aware that it's the same. However, if you have a better idea, just let me know.

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Contributor

Right, but right now, in f32 it says "the examples are f64" and in f64 it says "the examples are f32". If they're common they should be just one type, no? Or maybe we're just agreeing and slightly misunderstanding each other :)

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

Haha, I see your point. I rewrite it. :)

steveklabnik
steveklabnik reviewed Feb 26, 2016
View reviewed changes
src/libstd/primitive_docs.rs
@@ -488,6 +488,9 @@ mod prim_tuple { }
///
/// *[See also the `std::f32` module](f32/index.html).*
///
/// However, please note that examples are common for `f64` and `f32`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How about "please note that examples are shared between the f64"...

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Contributor

One tiny wording tweak (for both, though I just left the comment on one) and then let's :shipit:

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Contributor

@bors: r+ rollup

🎊 ❤️

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 26, 2016

📌 Commit 25c62eb has been approved by steveklabnik

@Manishearth Manishearth mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2016
Merged
Manishearth added a commit to Manishearth/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2016
@Manishearth
Rollup merge of rust-lang#31918 - GuillaumeGomez:patch-3, r=steveklabnik
9c01031 
r? @steveklabnik

Fixes rust-lang#29334
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2016
@bors
Auto merge of #31932 - Manishearth:rollup, r=Manishearth
acdd3b9 
- Successful merges: #31909, #31918, #31922, #31926, #31928, #31929, #31930
- Failed merges:
@bors bors merged commit 25c62eb into rust-lang:master Feb 27, 2016
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez deleted the patch-3 branch February 28, 2016 20:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@steveklabnik steveklabnik

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@GuillaumeGomez @steveklabnik @bors