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

doc: remove over-explanation #29460

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

doc: remove over-explanation #29460

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

tshepang
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @alexcrichton

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

@@ -2553,10 +2553,7 @@ pub trait Extend<A> {
///
/// # Examples
///
/// Basic usage:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is becoming more common throughout the standard library as I go through things, so it should stay.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems not needed since there is no "Advanced usage" example

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's about consistency.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would call it consistency if it was everywhere, but it isn't.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would also remove all those instances, unless they were accompanied with "Advanced usage" examples.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As I go through the docs, I'm adding them, so this will become gradually so over time.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

r? @steveklabnik

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 3, 2015

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #29509) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

I think I'm 👎 on this PR overall. Extra explanation is good. Docs don't have to be terse.

@tshepang tshepang deleted the trim branch November 3, 2015 12:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants