This seems to match other uses of "be accessed" in the document.

… to be more precise.

Unfortunately it was reverted back to a broken state in
e06c515 by accident, so let's bring it forward
again!

Update libc to 0.2.21

Update to include android aarch64 and x86 improvements.

Library stabilizations for 1.17

Details of the stabilizations are available in the commits. Includes only library stabilizations; there are a couple of compiler stabilizations that should also be done for 1.17.

Will need a beta backport, which I will create after approval.

r? @alexcrichton

documented order of conversion between u32 an ipv4addr

This fixes rust-lang#40118

…uillaumeGomez

minor wording tweak to slice::{as_ptr, as_mut_ptr}

Per rust-lang#37334, the slice-as-pointer methods mentioned that "modifying the slice may cause its buffer to be reallocated", when in fact modifying the *slice* itself would cause no such change. (It is a borrow, after all!) This is a tweak to the wording of that line to stress it's the *collection* that could cause the buffer to be reallocated.

r? @steveklabnik

Fix typo in mutex.rs docs

This seems to match other uses of "be accessed" in the document.

…e, r=steveklabnik

Add docs for sort_unstable to unstable book

Tracking issue for the feature: rust-lang#40585

r? @steveklabnik

…sfackler

Fix a spelling error in HashMap documentation, and slightly reword surrounding text for precision

Noticed while reading docs just now.

It's possible that the prior wording *meant* to state that the seed's randomness depends on the exact instant that the system RNG was created, I guess.  But unless there's an API guarantee that this is the case, the wording seems over-precise.  Is there a formal API guarantee that would forbid, say, the system RNG from generating all output using the Intel RDRAND instruction?  I don't think the quality of output in that case would depend on when the RNG was created.  Yet it seems to me like it could well be a valid source of randomness when computing the initial seed.

For that reason, tying the randomness of the seed, to the quality of the RNG's output *at the precise instant the seed is computed*, seems less confining.  That instantaneous quality level could be determined by the quality at the instant the RNG was created -- but instantaneous quality need not be low for that precise reason.

…alexcrichton

Update the cargo submodule again

Unfortunately it was reverted back to a broken state in
e06c515 by accident, so let's bring it forward
again!