Denote examples better #2137
Open
Denote examples better #2137
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
by using `:` in the text and `> ` in the markdown. I replaced with a more distinct example in the first two `> ` blocks to denote better to the reader that these are examples. [The way it is currently written in the reference](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/#conventions) can create confusion. I looked a while at it, trying to make sense why you would write examples for terms in italics too (= I parsed this sentence as meta language), until I grasped that this sentence *is* an example (= the sentence is to be parsed as object language). This is partly due to the fact that `> ` blocks are not rendered in a special way at this position in the book. And further, the first example (the second paragraph of the first list item) was missing the `> `s.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
This one is not an example.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
By using
:in the text and>in the Markdown.I replaced with a more distinct example in the first two
>blocks to denote better to the reader that these are examples.The way it is currently written in the reference can create confusion. I looked awhile at it, trying to make sense why you would write examples for terms in italics too (= I parsed this sentence as meta language). Until I grasped that this sentence is an example (= the sentence is to be parsed as object language).
This is partly due to the fact that
>blocks are not rendered in a special way (at this position?) in the book. And further, the first example (the second paragraph of the first list item, which I have split into two examples) was missing the>s.Please modify at will. Just remove the ambiguity between object and meta language.