[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACD3TDPbBnZuvr0jJVtrgs_4AXXk1+HGZEH_uPp2iQVf+4Ff6A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 11:00:13 +0200
From: Deepak <iapain@...il.com>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
Nell Shamrell-Harrington <nells@...ux.microsoft.com>, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: update dbg macro outputs in docs
Hi,
Thanks for the quick review. I will rework on this patch.
> - It should explain what the change is and why it is done --
> currently it just says "outdated examples", without mentioning why
> they are updated or what the change is.
Sorry for not being outward with my commit message and thanks for
mentioning this. I will rework on that.
> - Please read the notes in the GitHub issue to know what tags you
> should add above the Signed-off-by one.
I have clearly missed that. I will include this in next patch version
> - Commit messages should not start with "Hi," (you can, however, add
> that kind of text/message below the `---` line and it will not go into
> the commit) and they should generally be written using the imperative
> mood.
Noted
> - Did you copy the output from the standard library? Did you
> double-check if our output looks like that (in terms of the column
> number)? Mentioning this in the commit message is a good idea.
Output wasn't copied from std lib, instead it was adjusted to reflect examples.
> - The GitHub issue mentioned the column numbers, so this is good;
> however, did you compare this file with the standard library one to
> check if other changes/improvements could be imported?
I did compare `std_vendor.rs` with std lib and I didn't observe any
change in the code. As mentioned in the GH issue, only inconsistency
which I did notice as well was the missing column number in outputs.
Cheers,
Deepak
Powered by blists - more mailing lists