From 61653e0f1cdaf039d1adbe9100bf76657f1f6d19 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jamie <2119834+jamieQ@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 07:16:50 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] [gardening]: minor copy edit in footnote of 0474-yielding-accessors.md remove a superfluous word --- proposals/0474-yielding-accessors.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/proposals/0474-yielding-accessors.md b/proposals/0474-yielding-accessors.md index ddc572f4a8..6ede23b7cf 100644 --- a/proposals/0474-yielding-accessors.md +++ b/proposals/0474-yielding-accessors.md @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ To fulfill such a requirement, the conformance must provide a getter, meaning it In practical terms, this means that the requirement cannot be witnessed by a stored property or a `yielding borrow` accessor when the result is of noncopyable type,[^2] since the storage of a stored property is owned by the containing aggregate and the result of a `yielding borrow` is owned by the suspended coroutine, and it would be necessary to copy to provide ownership to the caller. However, if the type of the `get` requirement is copyable, the compiler can synthesize the getter from the other accessor kinds by introducing copies as necessary. -[^2]: While the compiler does currently accept such code currently, it does so by interpreting that `get` as a `yielding borrow`, which is a bug. +[^2]: While the compiler does currently accept such code, it does so by interpreting that `get` as a `yielding borrow`, which is a bug. ### `yielding mutate`