From 340c25aebfee25534b8b95fa7ed7afd35e0b2e4b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Steve Klabnik Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 16:43:45 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Clarify claims about PhantomData. This wording was too strong. Fixes #27523 --- src/libcore/marker.rs | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/libcore/marker.rs b/src/libcore/marker.rs index ebd6ba544e460..c0956753c988c 100644 --- a/src/libcore/marker.rs +++ b/src/libcore/marker.rs @@ -273,7 +273,11 @@ macro_rules! impls{ /// even though it does not. This allows you to inform the compiler about certain safety properties /// of your code. /// -/// Though they both have scary names, `PhantomData` and "phantom types" are unrelated. 👻👻👻 +/// # A ghastly note 👻👻👻 +/// +/// Though they both have scary names, `PhantomData` and 'phantom types' are related, but not +/// identical. Phantom types are a more general concept that don't require `PhantomData` to +/// implement, but `PhantomData` is the most common way to implement them in a correct manner. /// /// # Examples ///