From e61234eaecd57f6585eb6018a1d0cea4974a7019 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dan Gohman Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 08:27:32 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Reword the question in the section header too. This adopts the wording suggested in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97837#discussion_r892524129. --- std/src/os/unix/io/mod.rs | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/std/src/os/unix/io/mod.rs b/std/src/os/unix/io/mod.rs index 0a9c95fd4..044cfb221 100644 --- a/std/src/os/unix/io/mod.rs +++ b/std/src/os/unix/io/mod.rs @@ -44,14 +44,14 @@ //! Like boxes, `OwnedFd` values conceptually own the resource they point to, //! and free (close) it when they are dropped. //! -//! ## What about `/proc/self/mem` and similar OS features? +//! ## `/proc/self/mem` and similar OS features //! //! Some platforms have special files, such as `/proc/self/mem`, which //! provide read and write access to the process's memory. Such reads //! and writes happen outside the control of the Rust compiler, so they do not //! uphold Rust's memory safety guarantees. //! -//! However, this does not mean that all APIs that might allow `/proc/self/mem` +//! This does not mean that all APIs that might allow `/proc/self/mem` //! to be opened and read from or written must be `unsafe`. Rust's safety guarantees //! only cover what the program itself can do, and not what entities outside //! the program can do to it. `/proc/self/mem` is considered to be such an