Fix stale comments

[joshlf]

---

• 👉 Fix stale comments #2896

Latest Update: v2 — Compare vs v1

📚 Full Patch History

Links show the diff between the row version and the column version.

Version	v1	Base
v2	vs v1	vs Base
v1		vs Base

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @joshlf, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request focuses on improving the accuracy and clarity of the codebase's internal documentation and comments. It addresses several instances of stale or incorrect references, method names, and minor formatting issues across various files, ensuring that the inline explanations and safety comments are up-to-date and precise.

Highlights

• Documentation Correction in byte_slice.rs: Updated a safety comment to correctly reference self.len() instead of bytes.len().
• Formatting Adjustment in byteorder.rs: Removed an extraneous empty line within a test module definition.
• Reference Fix in impls.rs: Corrected a numerical reference in a comment from [2] to [1].
• Method Name Updates in lib.rs: Renamed references to mut_from and ref_from to their correct counterparts, mut_from_bytes and ref_from_bytes, in documentation and test comments.
• Type Name Correction in pointer/inner.rs: Adjusted a comment to correctly refer to PtrInner instead of Ptr.
• Typo Fix in pointer/ptr.rs: Corrected a typo in a FIXME comment, changing NonNulSlicelExt to NonNullExt.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request does a good job of fixing stale comments across the codebase, improving clarity and consistency. The changes correctly update references to renamed methods and fix typos. I've identified a couple of opportunities to also update stale test function names to match the methods they are testing, which would further improve maintainability.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.90%. Comparing base (0f16595) to head (998fa8b).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2896      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.90%   91.90%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          20       20              
  Lines        5878     5877       -1     
==========================================
- Hits         5402     5401       -1     
  Misses        476      476              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.