@@ -371,14 +371,14 @@ struct RegionResolutionVisitor<'tcx> {
371371
372372 // The number of expressions and patterns visited in the current body
373373 expr_and_pat_count : usize ,
374- // When this is ' true' , we record the Scopes we encounter
374+ // When this is ` true` , we record the ` Scopes` we encounter
375375 // when processing a Yield expression. This allows us to fix
376376 // up their indices.
377377 pessimistic_yield : bool ,
378378 // Stores scopes when pessimistic_yield is true.
379379 // Each time we encounter an ExprKind::AssignOp, we push
380- // a new Vec into the outermost Vec. This inner Vec is uesd
381- // to store any scopes we encounter when visiting the inenr expressions
380+ // a new Vec into the outermost Vec. This inner Vec is used
381+ // to store any scopes we encounter when visiting the inner expressions
382382 // of the AssignOp. Once we finish visiting the inner expressions, we pop
383383 // off the inner Vec, and process the Scopes it contains.
384384 // This allows us to handle nested AssignOps - while a terrible idea,
@@ -963,9 +963,9 @@ fn resolve_expr<'tcx>(visitor: &mut RegionResolutionVisitor<'tcx>, expr: &'tcx h
963963 let prev_pessimistic = visitor. pessimistic_yield ;
964964
965965 // Ordinarily, we can rely on the visit order of HIR intravisit
966- // to correspond to the actual exectuion order of statements.
966+ // to correspond to the actual execution order of statements.
967967 // However, there's a weird corner case with compund assignment
968- // operators (e.g. ' a += b' ). The evaluation order depends on whether
968+ // operators (e.g. ` a += b` ). The evaluation order depends on whether
969969 // or not the operator is overloaded (e.g. whether or not a trait
970970 // like AddAssign is implemented).
971971
@@ -996,10 +996,10 @@ fn resolve_expr<'tcx>(visitor: &mut RegionResolutionVisitor<'tcx>, expr: &'tcx h
996996 // To determine the actual execution order, we need to perform
997997 // trait resolution. Unfortunately, we need to be able to compute
998998 // yield_in_scope before type checking is even done, as it gets
999- // used by AST borrowcheck
999+ // used by AST borrowcheck.
10001000 //
10011001 // Fortunately, we don't need to know the actual execution order.
1002- // It sufficies to know the 'worst case' order with respect to yields.
1002+ // It suffices to know the 'worst case' order with respect to yields.
10031003 // Specifically, we need to know the highest 'expr_and_pat_count'
10041004 // that we could assign to the yield expression. To do this,
10051005 // we pick the greater of the two values from the left-hand
@@ -1029,7 +1029,7 @@ fn resolve_expr<'tcx>(visitor: &mut RegionResolutionVisitor<'tcx>, expr: &'tcx h
10291029
10301030 // If the actual execution order turns out to be right-to-left,
10311031 // then we're fine. However, if the actual execution order is left-to-right,
1032- // then we'll assign too low of a count to any ' yield' expressions
1032+ // then we'll assign too low a count to any ` yield` expressions
10331033 // we encounter in 'right_expression' - they should really occur after all of the
10341034 // expressions in 'left_expression'.
10351035 visitor. visit_expr ( & right_expression) ;
@@ -1474,7 +1474,7 @@ fn region_scope_tree<'tcx>(tcx: TyCtxt<'tcx>, def_id: DefId) -> &'tcx ScopeTree
14741474 } ,
14751475 terminating_scopes : Default :: default ( ) ,
14761476 pessimistic_yield : false ,
1477- fixup_scopes : vec ! [ ]
1477+ fixup_scopes : vec ! [ ] ,
14781478 } ;
14791479
14801480 let body = tcx. hir ( ) . body ( body_id) ;
0 commit comments