Skip to content

Commit f722591

Browse files
committed
Nit: fix wording in README
1 parent 5a8c1eb commit f722591

File tree

1 file changed

+9
-9
lines changed
  • src/librustc/infer/lexical_region_resolve

1 file changed

+9
-9
lines changed

src/librustc/infer/lexical_region_resolve/README.md

Lines changed: 9 additions & 9 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -9,15 +9,15 @@ Note that we use the terms region and lifetime interchangeably.
99
See the [general inference README](../README.md) for an overview of
1010
how lexical-region-solving fits into the bigger picture.
1111

12-
Region constraint collect uses a somewhat more involved algorithm than
13-
type inference. It is not the most efficient thing ever written though
14-
it seems to work well enough in practice (famous last words). The
15-
reason that we use a different algorithm is because, unlike with
16-
types, it is impractical to hand-annotate with regions (in some cases,
17-
there aren't even the requisite syntactic forms). So we have to get
18-
it right, and it's worth spending more time on a more involved
19-
analysis. Moreover, regions are a simpler case than types: they don't
20-
have aggregate structure, for example.
12+
Region inference uses a somewhat more involved algorithm than type
13+
inference. It is not the most efficient thing ever written though it
14+
seems to work well enough in practice (famous last words). The reason
15+
that we use a different algorithm is because, unlike with types, it is
16+
impractical to hand-annotate with regions (in some cases, there aren't
17+
even the requisite syntactic forms). So we have to get it right, and
18+
it's worth spending more time on a more involved analysis. Moreover,
19+
regions are a simpler case than types: they don't have aggregate
20+
structure, for example.
2121

2222
## The problem
2323

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)