Document bounds checking in the book #30310
Conversation
|
(Note: This PR doesn't add anything to the API docs yet; I'd like to do that in a follow-up issue after we work out what to put in the book.) |
src/doc/book/vectors.md
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You don't need the extra []s here
normally, this would be a big issue, but since we're doing a reorganization soon, it's cool. r=me with the nit |
mbrubeck
force-pushed
the
doc-vec-bounds
branch
from
ac55c12 to
5b9dd6a
Compare
|
Fixed the nit. |
|
@bors: r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 5b9dd6a has been approved by |
|
⌛ Testing commit 5b9dd6a with merge 8a68364... |
|
💔 Test failed - auto-mac-64-opt |
|
@bors: retry On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:00 AM, bors notifications@github.com wrote:
|
r? @steveklabnik Currently neither the API docs nor the book clearly explain that out-of-bounds array indexing causes a panic. Since this is fairly important and seems to surprise a number of new Rust programmers, I think it's worth adding to both places. (But if you think it would be better to put this info in the API docs only, that's fine too.) Some specific things I'd like feedback on: * The new text here talks about panicking, which hasn't been formally introduced at this point in chapter 5 (though it has been mentioned in previous sections too). * Similarly the `Vec::get` example uses `Option<T>` which hasn't been fully introduced yet. Should we leave out this example?
4 participants
r? @steveklabnik
Currently neither the API docs nor the book clearly explain that out-of-bounds array indexing causes a panic. Since this is fairly important and seems to surprise a number of new Rust programmers, I think it's worth adding to both places. (But if you think it would be better to put this info in the API docs only, that's fine too.)
Some specific things I'd like feedback on:
Vec::getexample usesOption<T>which hasn't been fully introduced yet. Should we leave out this example?