reference
reference copied to clipboard
rust-lang
The Rust Reference
We are in the process of changing this (rust-lang/rust#69663), but it would be good to document the existing rules before changing them. This should also help explain the compilation errors...
It looks like there is lifetime elision logic for [`impl trait` in return position](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/1522-conservative-impl-trait.html), but these rules are not documented in the reference iuc: The following code type-checks, but does...
Hello! We know that in the expression `y = x`, coercion may or may not happen, depending on whether y has explicit type annotation. So it seems this may be...
Including a simple example of e.g. how the `vec!` macro uses repetition would increase clarity. As someone who is not familiar with `macro_rules!`, I find the section on repetition very...
From my understanding of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89551, constant expressions can now dereference non-mutable raw pointers. I believe [this line](https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/blob/06f9e61931bcf58b91dfe6c924057e42ce273ee1/src/const_eval.md?plain=1#L42) needs updating.
Change 2nd substatement from being factual to being a possibility to hint at the following behavior: ```rust fn main() { let ex0 = if true {42;}; /* Passes, value is...
In the list [of coercions](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/type-coercions.html?highlight=deref#coercion-sites), it is claimed in the section of function arguments > For method calls, the receiver (self parameter) can only take advantage of unsized coercions. But...
Hey! I'm not sure whether here is the right place to open this issue, but I've been in a discussion with @nox about the things that are allowed with `repr(transparent)`...
The subsection on temporary lifetime extension currently contains the following warning: > Note: The exact rules for temporary lifetime extension are subject to change. This is describing the current behavior...
Currently some chapters having sub-sections are totally blank in the top-level, while some chapters has contents within the chapter-link. Personally i think this is both inconsistent and ugly. I'd suggest...