Reword the question in the section header too.
This adopts the wording suggested in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97837#discussion_r892524129.
This commit is contained in:
parent
e89ec68d5d
commit
158ff5cdd4
1 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions
|
|
@ -44,14 +44,14 @@
|
|||
//! Like boxes, `OwnedFd` values conceptually own the resource they point to,
|
||||
//! and free (close) it when they are dropped.
|
||||
//!
|
||||
//! ## What about `/proc/self/mem` and similar OS features?
|
||||
//! ## `/proc/self/mem` and similar OS features
|
||||
//!
|
||||
//! Some platforms have special files, such as `/proc/self/mem`, which
|
||||
//! provide read and write access to the process's memory. Such reads
|
||||
//! and writes happen outside the control of the Rust compiler, so they do not
|
||||
//! uphold Rust's memory safety guarantees.
|
||||
//!
|
||||
//! However, this does not mean that all APIs that might allow `/proc/self/mem`
|
||||
//! This does not mean that all APIs that might allow `/proc/self/mem`
|
||||
//! to be opened and read from or written must be `unsafe`. Rust's safety guarantees
|
||||
//! only cover what the program itself can do, and not what entities outside
|
||||
//! the program can do to it. `/proc/self/mem` is considered to be such an
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue