Multine Comments missing in the book

[dccoder84]

I am speaking about these comments:
/* blabla
blabla */

According to the rust reference they are available.

[TimNN]

This is deliberate as far as I know, and PR's adding them to the book were previously rejected, see #17903 and #28411.

[GuillaumeGomez]

cc @steveklabnik

[dccoder84]

Hmmm...
I don't understand why they are considered bad style. At least they should be mentioned and it should be explained why they are bad style.

[dccoder84]

When it is bad style, why are they available at all?

[steveklabnik]

The book is not meant to be comprehensive, that's the reference's job. It is meant to cover almost everything, but not always in total detail. It's supposed to guide you down the right path and give you an overview of the language at a high level.

They're valid syntax because they already existed for a long time, and there wasn't enough justification to remove them entirely.

On Sep 8, 2016, 07:39 -0400, dccoder84 notifications@github.com, wrote:

When it is bad style, why are they available at all?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub (#36345 (comment)), or mute the thread (https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABsiuVpeA0BGKxcD3lwaxqXJir7FfZqks5qn_QCgaJpZM4J33W8).

[steveklabnik]

(I thought I closed this before, but I didn't. Closing now.)