Skip to content
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.

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

Update links #1942

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 24, 2017
Merged

Update links #1942

merged 4 commits into from
Mar 24, 2017

Conversation

patiences
Copy link
Contributor

Old links to prototypes are obsolete, should link to source instead.

Old links to prototypes are obsolete, should link to source instead.
@tmccrmck
Copy link

tmccrmck commented Mar 6, 2017

Hey thanks! I was actually looking for the MIR representation today from this RFC. Helped me find it :)

text/1211-mir.md Outdated
current AST to the HIR is not yet complete, but it can be found in the
[`tcx` module][tcx].
current AST to the HIR is not yet complete, but it can be found
[here][hair-mod].
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In either the text or link there is some confusion between the HIR and the HAIR

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

My understanding is that the RFC is talking about HAIR and not HIR. I guess the text should reflect that! :) I'll make another change.

@killercup
Copy link
Member

@nrc
Copy link
Member

nrc commented Mar 8, 2017

r? @nikomatsakis

@nrc nrc added the T-lang Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the RFC. label Mar 8, 2017
@patiences
Copy link
Contributor Author

@killercup Didn't know you could do that :) Are you suggesting to use that specific revision?

@killercup
Copy link
Member

killercup commented Mar 10, 2017

@patiences That was just the latest commit when I wrote the comment. If you don't want to change the RFC, you could also use a revision from the time the RFC was written.

Edit: Aside from the links stuff, it might be nice to add a "Changes in the Implementation" addendum to the RFC.

@patiences
Copy link
Contributor Author

@killercup It would be cool if we could link to the commit from when this was written to preserve the RFC (I'd be interested in seeing MIR at its earliest stages myself!) but I think the code has moved from Niko's repo to the Rust repo since the time of writing. I'm afraid I don't know if the original prototype stuff is still around.

I'd love to see such an addendum too, but I'm not qualified to write that... :)

@nikomatsakis How's this look to you? :)

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor

@patiences definitely we should update the links; it seems like linking to master is almost guaranteed to go out-of-date eventually, though, so perhaps we should link to at least the current HEAD revision?

sorry for being slow to give feedback.

@patiences
Copy link
Contributor Author

Okay, done :)

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor

@patiences great thanks :)

@nikomatsakis nikomatsakis merged commit e8a7c1b into rust-lang:master Mar 24, 2017
@Centril Centril added the not-rfc For PRs that fix things like spelling mistakes, wrong file names, etc. label Nov 23, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
not-rfc For PRs that fix things like spelling mistakes, wrong file names, etc. T-lang Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the RFC.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants