On 10/20/25 11:55 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote: > Fix two grammatical errors in the Rust coding guidelines document. > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes <[email protected]> > --- > Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >
Reviewed-by: John Hubbard <[email protected]> thanks, -- John Hubbard > diff --git a/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst > b/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst > index 6ff9e754755d..d556f0db042b 100644 > --- a/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst > +++ b/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst > @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ should still be used. For instance: > // TODO: ... > fn f() {} > > -One special kind of comments are the ``// SAFETY:`` comments. These must > appear > +One special kind of comment is the ``// SAFETY:`` comment. These must appear > before every ``unsafe`` block, and they explain why the code inside the > block is > correct/sound, i.e. why it cannot trigger undefined behavior in any case, > e.g.: > > @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ in the kernel: > - While not shown here, if a function may panic, the conditions under which > that happens must be described under a ``# Panics`` section. > > - Please note that panicking should be very rare and used only with a good > + Please note that panicking should be very rare and used only for a good > reason. In almost all cases, a fallible approach should be used, typically > returning a ``Result``. >
