Reword explanations on the return type's lifetime #1782
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The current explantion is telling that the return type's lifetime is at leat 'a. It suggests that this reference outlives the `&str`s given in the input arguments. This is not correct as this would create invalid references.
|
Btw, the Travis failure is all about some code that doesn't compile in Chapter 14, i.e., it is spurious. |
mulkieran
approved these changes
Mar 20, 2019
|
@Shiroy Could you do a rebase and a force push to jiggle Travis into action (and hopefully passing). I'm not a core Rust reviewer, but I would like this to go in, and I think it has a better chance if the CI is passing. |
|
@carols10cents This is an obviously correct bug fix, rather than a mere rewording for clarity. |
|
I disagree -- #1875 (comment) |
|
See discussion on #1875; this is correct as-is. Thanks though! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The current explanation is telling that the return type's lifetime is at leat 'a.
It suggests that this reference outlives the
&strs given in the input arguments.This is not correct as this would creates invalid references.