Wordsmith the edition documentation a bit more #9233
Merged
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
|
r? @Eh2406 (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
This hopes to clear up a few recent PRs about the `edition` key in the manifest. It shuffles things around so the defaults are talked about in two different paragraphs. The first one talks about how `cargo new` uses the 2018 edition and is the only paragraph to use the word "default". The second section talks about the usage of 2015 with no `edition` field present. This didn't end up being quite as clear as I hoped it might be, but I'm hoping that this provides a bit more emphasis or otherwise just restructures things a bit to be more clear.
alexcrichton
force-pushed
the
reword-edition
branch
from
2475274
to
849b0f3
Compare
ehuss
reviewed
Mar 8, 2021
Co-authored-by: Eric Huss <eric@huss.org>
|
Thanks! @bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit ce00667 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Dylan-DPC-zz
pushed a commit
to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2021
Update cargo 7 commits in 970bc67c3775781b9708c8a36893576b9459c64a..32da9eaa5de5be241cf8096ca6b749a157194f77 2021-03-07 18:09:40 +0000 to 2021-03-13 01:18:40 +0000 - Fix logic for determining prefer-dynamic for a dylib. (rust-lang/cargo#9252) - Fix issue with filtering exclusive target dependencies. (rust-lang/cargo#9255) - Update pkgid-spec docs. (rust-lang/cargo#9249) - Wordsmith the edition documentation a bit more (rust-lang/cargo#9233) - Package ID specification urls must contain a host (rust-lang/cargo#9188) - Add documentation for JSON message_path. (rust-lang/cargo#9247) - Fix filter_platform to run on targets other than x86. (rust-lang/cargo#9246)
JohnTitor
added a commit
to JohnTitor/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 14, 2021
Update cargo 7 commits in 970bc67c3775781b9708c8a36893576b9459c64a..32da9eaa5de5be241cf8096ca6b749a157194f77 2021-03-07 18:09:40 +0000 to 2021-03-13 01:18:40 +0000 - Fix logic for determining prefer-dynamic for a dylib. (rust-lang/cargo#9252) - Fix issue with filtering exclusive target dependencies. (rust-lang/cargo#9255) - Update pkgid-spec docs. (rust-lang/cargo#9249) - Wordsmith the edition documentation a bit more (rust-lang/cargo#9233) - Package ID specification urls must contain a host (rust-lang/cargo#9188) - Add documentation for JSON message_path. (rust-lang/cargo#9247) - Fix filter_platform to run on targets other than x86. (rust-lang/cargo#9246)
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.
This hopes to clear up a few recent PRs about the
editionkey in themanifest. It shuffles things around so the defaults are talked about in
two different paragraphs. The first one talks about how
cargo newusesthe 2018 edition and is the only paragraph to use the word "default".
The second section talks about the usage of 2015 with no
editionfieldpresent.
This didn't end up being quite as clear as I hoped it might be, but I'm
hoping that this provides a bit more emphasis or otherwise just
restructures things a bit to be more clear.