bjoernager/rust
bjoernager/rust
1
Fork 0
Code Activity

auto merge of #13585 : brandonw/rust/patch-1, r=cmr

Browse source 
The original text stated that one should only return a unique or managed pointer if you were given one in the first place. This makes it sound as if the function *should* return a unique pointer if it were given a unique pointer. The rest of the section goes on to describe why this is bad, and the example of bad code does exactly what the rule just said to do.

I reworded the original rule into a reference to the more concise rule mentioned at the bottom of the section, which helps add emphasis (a la 'it bears repeating').
This commit is contained in:
bors 2014-04-18 04:11:19 -07:00
commit ce2bab68d6
1 changed files with 3 additions and 2 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

5
src/doc/guide-pointers.md
View file

@ -430,8 +430,9 @@ great detail, so if you want the full details, check that out.
# Returning Pointers
We've talked a lot about functions that accept various kinds of pointers, but
what about returning them? Here's the rule of thumb: only return a unique or
managed pointer if you were given one in the first place.
what about returning them? In general, it is better to let the caller decide
how to use a function's output, instead of assuming a certain type of pointer
is best.
What does that mean? Don't do this: