Skip to content

Some typos and improvements for the book #68

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
Lonami opened this issue Aug 17, 2019 · 5 comments · Fixed by #376
Closed

Some typos and improvements for the book #68

Lonami opened this issue Aug 17, 2019 · 5 comments · Fixed by #376
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation feedback wanted Needs feedback from users good first issue Good for newcomers

Comments

@Lonami
Copy link

Lonami commented Aug 17, 2019

Collecting a few of them here before making a single commit with all fixes:

  • In general, Title Case is not followed consistently for titles.

  • std::future and futures-rs

    […] you link those in.. Both uses […]

    There are two periods when there should be either one or three.

  • Stability and SemVer

    […] we introducece functionality […]

    Typo for "introduce".

    […] in which case we give at least 3 month of ahead notice.

    This sounds a bit off to me. Maybe "we will give a notice at least 3 months ahead" is better.

  • Futures

    […] a very simplified view suffices for us:

    The list that follows starts its items with a lowercase letter. However, the list immediately below starts them with an uppercase letter. This is a bit distracting, and not consistent. Perhaps using a sentence is more appropriated, such as "Computation is a sequence of composable operations which can branch based on a decision, and either run to succession and yield a result, or they can yield an error".

    […] and how to react on potential events the... well... Future

    Probably something like "and how to react on potential events in the… well, Future" is better.

    I noticed here that code blocks are not syntax-highlighted. Is there a reason for this?

    When this function is called, it will produce a Future<Output=String>

    That's not the case though, is it? The function is async fn ... -> Result<String, io::Error>, not async fn ... -> String.

    […] a value available sometime later

    Should that be "available some time later" or "some later time"?

    *we will introduce you to tasks, which we need to actually run Futures

    A bit earlier it was said that calling poll repeatedly was enough to drive a future to completion. So is "need" the right word here?

  • Tasks

    Now that we know what Futures are, we now want to run them!

    "Now" is repeated too soon. Maybe "Now that we know what Futures are, we want to run them!" works better.

    […] task can also has a name and an ID, just like a thread

    Task can also have a name.

    The carry desirable metadata for debugging

    They carry.

    […] task api handles […]

    task API.

    […] mix well with they concurrent execution […]

    with the concurrent.

    Result<T,E>

    Missing space after the comma.

@yoshuawuyts
Copy link
Contributor

@Lonami hi! Thanks so much for opening this! -- I noticed you never got around to following this up with a PR. Are you still interested in doing so? Is there anything we can do to help?

Thanks heaps!

@yoshuawuyts yoshuawuyts added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Sep 18, 2019
@Lonami
Copy link
Author

Lonami commented Sep 18, 2019

I did not intend making a PR myself. Rather, I wanted to document a few mistakes, and maybe other people found more. Once we felt they were enough to fix, then anyone could open said PR :)

@yoshuawuyts
Copy link
Contributor

@Lonami ah yeah that makes sense -- I'll mark this as "help wanted" then so someone who wants to contribute can pick this up. Thanks heaps!

@yoshuawuyts yoshuawuyts added good first issue Good for newcomers feedback wanted Needs feedback from users labels Sep 18, 2019
@AZanellato
Copy link
Contributor

Hello! Can I pick this up then? 😄

@skade
Copy link
Collaborator

skade commented Oct 5, 2019 via email

moh-eulith pushed a commit to moh-eulith/async-std that referenced this issue Mar 31, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation feedback wanted Needs feedback from users good first issue Good for newcomers
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants