-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.4k
Add type definition example to the manual, consider changing the term to "type alias". #9266
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
Comments
Yeah, I'm not sure what the right terminology is here. Hmm. |
@aturon what do you think? |
+1 for "type alias" -- much clearer. |
steveklabnik
added a commit
to steveklabnik/rust
that referenced
this issue
Dec 11, 2014
brson
added a commit
to brson/rust
that referenced
this issue
Dec 12, 2014
brson
added a commit
to brson/rust
that referenced
this issue
Dec 13, 2014
brson
added a commit
to brson/rust
that referenced
this issue
Dec 15, 2014
dlrobertson
pushed a commit
to dlrobertson/rust
that referenced
this issue
Nov 29, 2018
flip1995
pushed a commit
to flip1995/rust
that referenced
this issue
Aug 11, 2022
…en_fix, r=Jarcho Fix cast_abs_to_unsigned with code in parens Close rust-lang#9185 changelog: none
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The Type Definitions section of the Manual would benefit from some code examples, especially those that clarify how traits and impls interact with the new name.
I find the term "type definition" confusing because this section seems to be describing what I think of as "type aliases". Aren't
enum
andstruct
also examples of "type definitions"? If so, is it worth changing this terminology?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: