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

Fix rusty grammar in std::error::Reporter docs #97144

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 22, 2022
Merged

Conversation

samziz
Copy link
Contributor

@samziz samziz commented May 18, 2022

Commit

I initially saw "print's" instead of "prints" at the start of the doc comment for std::error::Reporter, while reading the docs for that type. Then I figured 'probably more where that came from', so, as well as correcting the foregoing to "prints", I've patched up these three minor solecisms (well, two types, three tokens):

  • One use of the indicative which should be subjunctive - indeed the sentence immediately following it, which mirrors its structure, does use the subjunctive (L871). Replaced with the subjunctive.
  • Two separate clauses joined with commas (L975, L1023). Replaced the first with a semicolon and the second with a period. Admittedly those judgements are pretty much 100% subjective, based on my sense of how the sentences flowed into each other (though ofc the replacement of the comma itself is not subjective or opinion-based).

I know this is silly and finicky, but I hope it helps tidy up the docs a bit for future readers!

PR notes

This is very much non-urgent (and, honestly, non-important). I just figured it might be a nice quality-of-life improvement and bit of tidying up for the core contributors themselves not to have to do. 🙂

I'm tagging Steve, per the contributing guidelines ("Steve usually reviews documentation changes. So if you were to make a documentation change, add r? @steveklabnik"):

r? @steveklabnik

I initially saw "print's" instead of "prints" at the start of the doc comment for `std::error::Reporter`, while reading the docs for that type. Then I figured 'probably more where that came from', so, as well as correcting the foregoing to "prints", I've patched up these three minor solecisms (well, two [types](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type%E2%80%93token_distinction), three [tokens](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type%E2%80%93token_distinction)):

- One use of the indicative which should be subjunctive - indeed the sentence immediately following it, which mirrors its structure, _does_ use the subjunctive ([L871](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/library/std/src/error.rs?plain=1#L871)). Replaced with the subjunctive.
- Two separate clauses joined with commas ([L975](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/library/std/src/error.rs?plain=1#L975), [L1023](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/library/std/src/error.rs?plain=1#L1023)). Replaced the first with a semicolon and the second with a period. Admittedly those judgements are pretty much 100% subjective, based on my sense of how the sentences flowed into each other (though ofc the _replacement of the comma itself_ is not subjective or opinion-based).

I know this is silly and finicky, but I hope it helps tidy up the docs a bit for future readers!
@rustbot rustbot added the T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label May 18, 2022
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with r? rust-lang/libs-api @rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs to request review from a libs-api team reviewer. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

  • Stabilizing library features
  • Introducing insta-stable changes such as new implementations of existing stable traits on existing stable types
  • Introducing new or changing existing unstable library APIs (excluding permanently unstable features / features without a tracking issue)
  • Changing public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees
  • Changing observable runtime behavior of library APIs

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @steveklabnik (or someone else) soon.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label May 18, 2022
@Dylan-DPC
Copy link
Member

@bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 21, 2022

📌 Commit d8ef340 has been approved by Dylan-DPC

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels May 21, 2022
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 22, 2022
Rollup of 6 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#97144 (Fix rusty grammar in `std::error::Reporter` docs)
 - rust-lang#97225 (Fix `Display` for `cell::{Ref,RefMut}`)
 - rust-lang#97228 (Omit stdarch workspace from rust-src)
 - rust-lang#97236 (Recover when resolution did not resolve lifetimes.)
 - rust-lang#97245 (Fix typo in futex RwLock::write_contended.)
 - rust-lang#97259 (Fix typo in Mir phase docs)

Failed merges:

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit e1340f2 into rust-lang:master May 22, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.63.0 milestone May 22, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants