In the save-analysis file of liballoc, the value/signature of
|
pub unsafe fn local_waker<W: Wake + 'static>(wake: Arc<W>) -> LocalWaker { |
looks like this:
fn <W> (wake: Arc<W>) -> LocalWaker, which is not valid rust code.
There is little documentation available for the save-analysis, but as far as I understood it, the value field is supposed to represent the signature. In most other languages, the signature of a function doesn't include the parameter names.
For consistency, I think it would be better if the field would either include the function name or leave of the parameter names.
Edit: I want this to be able to parse the string with syn, which expects either a name for the function or no names for the arguments.
In the save-analysis file of liballoc, the value/signature of
rust/src/liballoc/task.rs
Line 98 in 14b9665
fn <W> (wake: Arc<W>) -> LocalWaker, which is not valid rust code.There is little documentation available for the save-analysis, but as far as I understood it, the
valuefield is supposed to represent the signature. In most other languages, the signature of a function doesn't include the parameter names.For consistency, I think it would be better if the field would either include the function name or leave of the parameter names.
Edit: I want this to be able to parse the string with syn, which expects either a name for the function or no names for the arguments.