Improve wording in documentation of MaybeUninit

[nliberg]

Changes

variables are properly initialized at their respective type

into

variables are properly initialized as their respective type

[rust-highfive]

r? @joshtriplett

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[Centril]

This is not a typo. The use of "at" is intentional here.

[nliberg]

@Centril
If the "at" is intentional how is the sentence to be interpreted?

For what it's worth I dropped a quick question in the Rust chat about this, and I wasn't the only one to think the current sentence sounds strange.

[Centril]

If the "at" is intentional how is the sentence to be interpreted?

"The variable has type X and its value satisfies the invariants the type X puts upon it."

("at type X" is jargon from type theory. I don't think "as" is clearer but we can rewrite the sentence to not need it at all.)

[nliberg]

"at type X" is jargon from type theory

I see. I was not aware of that terminology - thanks for clarifying. I expect that to be true for most people who consult the documentation though.

[Centril]

r? @Centril

@nliberg Here's a wording that is hopefully clearer than both "as" and "at".

[nliberg]

@Centril

Thanks. That wording is indeed clearer.

[Centril]

:)

Can you squash the commits and adjust the line wrapping as well? Should be good to go after that.

[nliberg]

Can you squash the commits and adjust the line wrapping as well? Should be good to go after that.

Done. I hope it's ok now.

[Centril]

@bors r+ rollup

[bors]

📌 Commit fd505d7 has been approved by Centril

[RalfJung]

Thanks, LGTM as well. :)