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

[easy] iterator documentation improvement. #39294

Closed
iqualfragile opened this issue Jan 25, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

[easy] iterator documentation improvement. #39294

iqualfragile opened this issue Jan 25, 2017 · 1 comment
Labels
A-docs Area: Documentation for any part of the project, including the compiler, standard library, and tools C-enhancement Category: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.

Comments

@iqualfragile
Copy link

in the rust docs https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/trait.Iterator.html#method.filter_map

it says why is filter_map not equal to filter().map()

this makes no sense

it should ask

why is filter_map not equal to map().filter().

also would be nice to explain that filter_map is is basically map().filter(is_some).map(unwrap) might make it easier to grasp.

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum added the A-docs Area: Documentation for any part of the project, including the compiler, standard library, and tools label May 20, 2017
@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum added the C-enhancement Category: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one. label Jul 26, 2017
@frewsxcv
Copy link
Member

Addressed in #43965.

frewsxcv added a commit to frewsxcv/rust that referenced this issue Aug 19, 2017
bors added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 20, 2017
Minor Iterator::filter_map description rewording.

Fixes #39294.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-docs Area: Documentation for any part of the project, including the compiler, standard library, and tools C-enhancement Category: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants