Added generic example of std::ops::Add in doc comments by mandeep · Pull Request #41612 · rust-lang/rust

mandeep · 2017-04-28T18:20:44Z

We discussed on IRC how the std::ops examples were potentially missing examples using generics. This PR adds an example to std::ops::Add that shows the use of a generic type T. I'm not sure this is ready for merge as I think the two examples now make the documentation a bit verbose, but I think it's a good starting point. I'd love to hear others thoughts on this. This is in relation to the last item in issue #29365.

rust-highfive · 2017-04-28T18:20:57Z

r? @brson

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

frewsxcv · 2017-05-01T03:01:36Z

It seems like this example is being added to teach people how generic types work, which seems like a topic better suited for the book. That said, I imagine that using generic types when implementing Add could be a common scenario, so I'm alright with having this added.

@rust-lang/docs anyone else have opinions?

mandeep · 2017-05-01T03:28:33Z

@frewsxcv I agree, in fact the first edition of the book contains an example similar to the one in this PR. Rather than having to rummage through the book, I was thinking that something like this example should be able to be found in the API docs. What do you think?

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-05-01T08:52:09Z

Well, for me it's fine. It's just the trait Add which gets more examples.

GuillaumeGomez

Just little nits. Also, some comments in the code might help users.

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-05-01T08:52:22Z

Extra empty line.

Added the empty lines and comment regarding Output=T. Let me know if you'd like to see anything else.

We now have two extra lines. :p (remove 272 and 273)

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-05-01T08:52:34Z

Should be followed by an empty line.

mandeep · 2017-05-07T19:31:19Z

Thinking about this some more. Maybe this example is best left in the book instead of the std lib docs. Later on I imagine something like this could go into a cookbook as well.

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-05-08T12:01:50Z

I think it's a good thing to have it in multiple places. Can you just squash your commits please? Once done, I'll r+.

mandeep · 2017-05-08T13:30:08Z

Thanks!

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-05-08T14:35:09Z

I don't see any usage of the debug in the following code. Did you forget to remove it?

The other examples derived Debug, so I followed the same path. Do you want me to remove Debug in this example and the other examples in std::Ops?

Yes please (strange we kept them).

steveklabnik · 2017-05-09T14:14:06Z

@GuillaumeGomez looks like this was updated

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-05-09T14:42:24Z

@steveklabnik: I commented on my previous review.

mandeep · 2017-05-11T03:34:53Z

Looks like Debug was needed on a couple of the tests? How should we move forward?

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-05-11T08:36:15Z

Put it where needed. My goal wasn't to force you to remove the Debug implementations but to remove the useless ones. If both of them are needed, we keep them of course.

mandeep · 2017-05-11T13:46:17Z

My fault, I should have checked to see if Debug was needed.

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-05-11T16:11:43Z

Ok, all good. Please squash and then I merge.

Added blank lines around example Added comment to Add example referencing the Output type Removed whitespace from lines 272 and 273 Removed Debug derivation from Add examples Added Debug derivation

frewsxcv · 2017-05-13T21:44:52Z

@bors r=GuillaumeGomez,frewsxcv rollup

bors · 2017-05-13T21:44:53Z

📌 Commit a2a9d19 has been approved by GuillaumeGomez,frewsxcv

…meGomez,frewsxcv Added generic example of std::ops::Add in doc comments We discussed on IRC how the std::ops examples were potentially missing examples using generics. This PR adds an example to std::ops::Add that shows the use of a generic type T. I'm not sure this is ready for merge as I think the two examples now make the documentation a bit verbose, but I think it's a good starting point. I'd love to hear others thoughts on this. This is in relation to the last item in issue rust-lang#29365.

Rollup of 7 pull requests - Successful merges: #41612, #41826, #41939, #41946, #41950, #41975, #41979 - Failed merges:

Add generic example of std::ops::Sub in doc comments This PR adds an example of using generics with std::ops::Sub and is a follow up of PR #41612 and is related to issue #29365. I also wanted to add examples to Mul and Div, but I think these two traits are already loaded with examples.

rust-highfive assigned brson Apr 28, 2017

frewsxcv added the A-docs Area: Documentation for any part of the project, including the compiler, standard library, and tools label Apr 30, 2017

frewsxcv added the S-waiting-on-team label May 1, 2017

GuillaumeGomez requested changes May 1, 2017
View reviewed changes

mandeep force-pushed the add-ops-generics branch from dfbf4d0 to d89e0e8Compare May 8, 2017 13:27

GuillaumeGomez reviewed May 8, 2017
View reviewed changes

mandeep force-pushed the add-ops-generics branch from d89e0e8 to 97b5ab9Compare May 8, 2017 17:58

mandeep force-pushed the add-ops-generics branch from 5ece65f to a2a9d19Compare May 11, 2017 16:24

Added generic example of std::ops::Add in doc comments
a2a9d19
Added blank lines around example Added comment to Add example referencing the Output type Removed whitespace from lines 272 and 273 Removed Debug derivation from Add examples Added Debug derivation

Mark-Simulacrum mentioned this pull request May 14, 2017
Rollup of 7 pull requests #41987
Merged

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request May 14, 2017
Auto merge of#41987- Mark-Simulacrum:rollup, r=Mark-Simulacrum
94497b7
Rollup of 7 pull requests - Successful merges: #41612, #41826, #41939, #41946, #41950, #41975, #41979 - Failed merges:

bors merged commit a2a9d19 into rust-lang:masterMay 14, 2017

mandeep mentioned this pull request Jul 22, 2017
Add generic example of std::ops::Sub in doc comments #43413
Merged

apiraino removed the S-waiting-on-team label May 25, 2023

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

mandeep commented Apr 28, 2017

Uh oh!

rust-highfive commented Apr 28, 2017

Uh oh!

frewsxcv commented May 1, 2017

Uh oh!

mandeep commented May 1, 2017

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented May 1, 2017

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomezMay 1, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mandeepMay 5, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomezMay 8, 2017• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomezMay 1, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mandeep commented May 7, 2017

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented May 8, 2017

Uh oh!

mandeep commented May 8, 2017

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomezMay 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mandeepMay 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomezMay 9, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

steveklabnik commented May 9, 2017

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented May 9, 2017

Uh oh!

mandeep commented May 11, 2017

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented May 11, 2017

Uh oh!

mandeep commented May 11, 2017

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented May 11, 2017

Uh oh!

frewsxcv commented May 13, 2017

Uh oh!

bors commented May 13, 2017

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

8 participants

GuillaumeGomezMay 8, 2017•
edited
Loading