Add doc comment to Vec::clone

[Omnikar]

I read about Clippy's repeat_vec_with_capacity lint and figured it was worth adding a note about the relevant behavior to the documentation of Vec::clone itself, which previously did not have its own doc comment.

[rustbot]

r? @joboet

rustbot has assigned @joboet.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

Why was this reviewer chosen?

The reviewer was selected based on:

• Owners of files modified in this PR: libs
• libs expanded to 7 candidates
• Random selection from Mark-Simulacrum, joboet

[joboet]

Good idea! The comment should however be a bit more vague about the actual capacity – we don't want to accidentally guarantee something we'd want to change later. How about saying that the capacity of the clone might not match the capacity of the original?

View changes since this review

[joboet]

@rustbot author

[rustbot]

Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use @rustbot ready.

[Omnikar]

Makes sense. @rustbot ready

[Omnikar]

Not sure what happened with the CI run

[jhpratt]

@bors try jobs=x86_64-gnu-tools

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 225e133 (225e13323067c661fa600699ed280e25d0213231, parent: c58275e0369d09fc3959b8ba87dcbcbe73797465)

[asder8215]

The doc comment looks good to me. joboet might say this soon, but make sure to squash your commits to one.

[Omnikar]

The doc comment looks good to me. joboet might say this soon, but make sure to squash your commits to one.

I have to squash manually? It doesn't happen with the PR merge?

[asder8215]

I have to squash manually?

Yep. I think you could also do this through bors as well (though I've always squashed manually in my editor, so never tried it).

It doesn't happen with the PR merge?

I believe the rustbot (or whoever has permissions to merge it into the main branch) do merge PRs, but I think the point of this is to simplify commit history. If I were to put my cursor on line 3813 in my code editor, it'll tell me that it belongs to commit 6803293; however, if I put it over the line 3817, it'll tell me that it belongs to commit cd22dda. It's just neater to see 4 commits you made as 1 within commit history and overall squashing makes it easier for people to find what was changed in that portion of code (e.g. in case we need to revert something in the future).

You can check out this git section of rust compiler dev guide here for their git policy and tips.

[Omnikar]

@bors squash msg="Add doc comment to Vec::clone"

[rust-bors]

🔨 4 commits were squashed into c812d6d.