Ch. 4: Rephrase/clarify paragraph on reference scope

[DreadedHippy]

I had to read this line more than 4 times to understand it. Having the "at" makes it more readable

[chriskrycho]

I can definitely sympathize with that experience, so I am sorry you had it! Unfortunately, the change actually makes the sentence incorrect grammatically, and the original is correct grammatically. We might be able to tweak it so the sentence reads like this, though:

Note that a reference’s scope starts from where it is introduced and continues through the last time that reference is used. For instance, this code will compile because the last usage of the immutable references, in the println!, occurs before the mutable reference is introduced:

That is still grammatically correct, preserving the structure of the sentence. Would it have helped with your confusion here?

[mon04]

@chriskrycho personally, I don't find that any better. But it is subjective.

How about:

Note that a reference’s scope starts from where it is introduced and continues through the last time that reference is used. For instance, this code will compile because the last usage of the immutable references, namely the println!, occurs before the mutable reference is introduced:

[chriskrycho]

I ended up going with a further variant which I think is much clearer:

Note that a reference’s scope starts from where it is introduced and continues through the last time that reference is used. For instance, this code will compile because the last usage of the immutable references is in the println!, before the mutable reference is introduced:

[DreadedHippy]

I ended up going with a further variant which I think is much clearer:

Note that a reference’s scope starts from where it is introduced and continues through the last time that reference is used. For instance, this code will compile because the last usage of the immutable references is in the println!, before the mutable reference is introduced:

This makes it alot easier to understand. Thank you

[chriskrycho]

You’re welcome! Thanks for flagging it up originally, and thanks @mon04 for the further feedback here as well. 👍🏼