@Iñaki Garay let's talk here
so, I was saying
please, squash commits and make separate PRs for the stages docs and for the broken links
leave https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-guide/pull/301 for the stages documentation
Is the travis build failing expected? Looking at the build output from https://travis-ci.com/rust-lang/rustc-guide/builds/108764339 it looks like it's trying to compile the sample output text enclosed in triple backticks. I'll add a bash qualifier to the section while I add the additional discussion in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/57963#issuecomment-458429280 but correct me preemptively if I'm wrong.
Just an update. Addressed PR comments but still rewording the discussion on issue 57963.
This https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-guide/pull/307 has to be merged before I can rebase and send the newest additions.
@Iñaki Garay something is wrong in the PR, the title is about broken links but there is a commit about the stages
I guess I'd split those and just provide the links commits in that PR
or what was your idea?
hmmm you're right
how did that get in there?
ah, my GH master has bad commits in it, fixing
that's more like it, fixed @Santiago Pastorino
I don’t have commit access so can’t merge it
Travis is still failing because of another unrelated error.
mdbook test is failing because of the two phase borrow changes.
This is the code snippet https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-guide/pull/305/files#diff-5311fe548c2eb1bbb4b4ab3ca2151676R18
I'm not sure whether the example code needs to be fixed or simply marked as
I see, the example code didn't compile with my outdated (rustc 1.36.0-nightly (33fe1131c 2019-04-20)) nightly compiler but it did after I ran
rustup update (with rustc 1.36.0-nightly (e305df184 2019-04-24))
So I guess it's just a matter of waiting for the CI toolchain to be updated (how does that happen? manooallee? automagically?) and not
ignoreing the snippet
PR finally updated. I swear the wait between submission and review feels like waiting for college grades all over again xD
@Iñaki Garay I don't know if people care that much, but I'd split in 2 commits, one the markdown/style fixes and another one with the real content
makes things cleaner and easier to review in general
left some comments