From b535a1dd654fd538776249d951593a8712d1b32a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: DJMrTV Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:26:28 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] fix typo in typenames of pin documentation --- library/core/src/pin.rs | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/library/core/src/pin.rs b/library/core/src/pin.rs index 83730285636fb..71044190f0c88 100644 --- a/library/core/src/pin.rs +++ b/library/core/src/pin.rs @@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ //! //! Note that this invariant is enforced by simply making it impossible to call code that would //! perform a move on the pinned value. This is the case since the only way to access that pinned -//! value is through the pinning [Pin]<[&mut] T>>, which in turn restricts our access. +//! value is through the pinning [Pin]<[&mut] T>, which in turn restricts our access. //! //! ## [`Unpin`] //! @@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ //! //! Exposing access to the inner field which you want to remain pinned must then be carefully //! considered as well! Remember, exposing a method that gives access to a -//! [Pin]<[&mut] InnerT>> where InnerT: [Unpin] would allow safe code to +//! [Pin]<[&mut] InnerT> where InnerT: [Unpin] would allow safe code to //! trivially move the inner value out of that pinning pointer, which is precisely what you're //! seeking to prevent! Exposing a field of a pinned value through a pinning pointer is called //! "projecting" a pin, and the more general case of deciding in which cases a pin should be able