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

mention implicit Sized bound in more places? #1023

Closed
tlyu opened this issue May 16, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1053
Closed

mention implicit Sized bound in more places? #1023

tlyu opened this issue May 16, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1053

Comments

@tlyu
Copy link
Contributor

tlyu commented May 16, 2021

While looking at #992, I found several other inconsistencies or omissions about implicit Sized bounds. 10.6 (Trait and lifetime bounds) says that ?Sized can be used to remove the implicit Sized bounds on type parameters or associated types. If 10.6 is correct about associated types, there are these omissions elsewhere:

  • Chapter 11 (Special types and traits) doesn't mention the implicit Sized bound on associated types, but does mention it for type parameters.
  • Neither 6.14 (Generic parameters) nor 6.15 (Associated Items) mentions the implicit Sized bound.
  • 10.2 (Dynamically Sized Types) should probably mention the implicit Sized bound for associated types. (It does mention them for type parameters.)

Also, chapter 11 should probably mention the ?Sized syntax for removing the implicit Sized bound.

I'm willing to work on a pull request for these, but it might require coordination with #992. (Alternatively, I could base a pull request off of #992, but I'm not sure how well that would work, especially given the pending requested changes there.)

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 a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant