From d0ad2513766733abc99da6af0cfe130abcd70744 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Flaper Fesp Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 09:14:56 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Use MuextArc and RWArc in docstrings --- src/libextra/arc.rs | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/libextra/arc.rs b/src/libextra/arc.rs index 08f57764e59b..3fbfae52c630 100644 --- a/src/libextra/arc.rs +++ b/src/libextra/arc.rs @@ -201,10 +201,10 @@ impl MutexArc { * The reason this function is 'unsafe' is because it is possible to * construct a circular reference among multiple Arcs by mutating the * underlying data. This creates potential for deadlock, but worse, this - * will guarantee a memory leak of all involved Arcs. Using mutex Arcs + * will guarantee a memory leak of all involved Arcs. Using MutexArcs * inside of other Arcs is safe in absence of circular references. * - * If you wish to nest mutex_arcs, one strategy for ensuring safety at + * If you wish to nest MutexArcs, one strategy for ensuring safety at * runtime is to add a "nesting level counter" inside the stored data, and * when traversing the arcs, assert that they monotonically decrease. * @@ -272,9 +272,9 @@ impl MutexArc { * requires the Freeze bound, which prohibits access on MutexArcs which * might contain nested MutexArcs inside. * - * The purpose of this is to offer a safe implementation of both methods - * access and access_cond to be used instead of rwlock in cases where no - * readers are needed and sightly better performance is required. + * The purpose of this is to offer a safe implementation of MutexArc to be + * used instead of RWArc in cases where no readers are needed and sightly + * better performance is required. * * Both methods have the same failure behaviour as unsafe_access and * unsafe_access_cond.