From 84741ed8ce900c5fab9984fe8d152cbff2af1809 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tshepang Mbambo Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 14:03:49 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] add reading pauses in doc comment --- compiler/rustc_lint_defs/src/builtin.rs | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/compiler/rustc_lint_defs/src/builtin.rs b/compiler/rustc_lint_defs/src/builtin.rs index f4e6e93356c7..d792e936ef34 100644 --- a/compiler/rustc_lint_defs/src/builtin.rs +++ b/compiler/rustc_lint_defs/src/builtin.rs @@ -3629,10 +3629,10 @@ declare_lint! { /// `stdcall`, `fastcall`, and `cdecl` calling conventions (or their unwind /// variants) on targets that cannot meaningfully be supported for the requested target. /// - /// For example `stdcall` does not make much sense for a x86_64 or, more apparently, powerpc + /// For example, `stdcall` does not make much sense for a x86_64 or, more apparently, powerpc /// code, because this calling convention was never specified for those targets. /// - /// Historically MSVC toolchains have fallen back to the regular C calling convention for + /// Historically, MSVC toolchains have fallen back to the regular C calling convention for /// targets other than x86, but Rust doesn't really see a similar need to introduce a similar /// hack across many more targets. /// @@ -3659,7 +3659,7 @@ declare_lint! { /// /// ### Explanation /// - /// On most of the targets the behaviour of `stdcall` and similar calling conventions is not + /// On most of the targets, the behaviour of `stdcall` and similar calling conventions is not /// defined at all, but was previously accepted due to a bug in the implementation of the /// compiler. pub UNSUPPORTED_CALLING_CONVENTIONS,