OpenE2K/rust
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Rollup merge of #47107 - mark-i-m:patch-1, r=steveklabnik

Browse Source 
Fix typo

I am assuming that there was once something else you could do and somebody forgot to remove "either". Is that correct?
This commit is contained in:
kennytm 2018-01-03 16:57:56 +08:00 committed by GitHub
commit dd0b70e3fe
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
src/librustc/mir/README.md
View File

@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ ensure that, before the MIR at a particular phase in the processing
pipeline is stolen, anyone who may want to read from it has already
done so. Concretely, this means that if you have some query `foo(D)`
that wants to access the result of `mir_const(D)` or
`mir_validated(D)`, you need to have the successor pass either "force"
`mir_validated(D)`, you need to have the successor pass "force"
`foo(D)` using `ty::queries::foo::force(...)`. This will force a query
to execute even though you don't directly require its result.