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

Replace 'e.g.' by 'i.e.' #36578

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 24, 2016
Merged

Replace 'e.g.' by 'i.e.' #36578

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 24, 2016

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Fixes #36577.

r? @steveklabnik

@hadronized
Copy link

You are the man! \o/

Copy link
Member

@steveklabnik steveklabnik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So, 'eg' is "for example", and ie is "in other words". That is, ie is for when things are equivalent, but eg is for providing one of many examples. Because I'm not 100% sure of the behavior of these functions, I'm not 100% sure which is correct here. Maybe @rust-lang/libs can chime in?

@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ impl Duration {

/// Returns the number of whole seconds represented by this duration.
///
/// The extra precision represented by this duration is ignored (e.g. extra
/// The extra precision represented by this duration is ignored (i.e. extra
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am not 100% sure of this one, mostly because I don't remember the exact semantics of this function.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe the change here is correct - the extra nanoseconds is the only thing dropped.

@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ impl Duration {
///
/// This method does **not** return the length of the duration when
/// represented by nanoseconds. The returned number always represents a
/// fractional portion of a second (e.g. it is less than one billion).
/// fractional portion of a second (i.e. it is less than one billion).
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

same here... hm.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same deal, this change seems right.

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

steveklabnik commented Sep 19, 2016

Hm, looks like @rust-lang/libs (a team) didn't get tagged in the review comment. @jessicard, (who I understand implemented this for GitHub) is that the expected behavior of the review summary feature? Don't worry about it, but figured I'd mention it.

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

Thanks @sfackler !

@bors: r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 19, 2016

📌 Commit 313fb8f has been approved by steveklabnik

@jessicard
Copy link

@steveklabnik Oh no! Tagging in a review summary is currently broken, but we've got it on our TODO list. Sorry about that, and thanks for letting me know ❤️

sophiajt pushed a commit to sophiajt/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 21, 2016
sophiajt pushed a commit to sophiajt/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 21, 2016
GuillaumeGomez added a commit to GuillaumeGomez/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 23, 2016
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 24, 2016
Rollup of 7 pull requests

- Successful merges: #36018, #36498, #36500, #36559, #36566, #36578, #36664
- Failed merges:
@bors bors merged commit 313fb8f into rust-lang:master Sep 24, 2016
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez deleted the fix_typo branch September 24, 2016 11:40
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.

6 participants