/// **What it does:** This lint checks for methods with certain name prefixes and which doesn't match how self is taken. The actual rules are:
///
/// **What it does:** This lint checks for methods with certain name prefixes and which doesn't match how self is taken. The actual rules are:
///
-/// |Prefix |`self` taken |
-/// |-------|--------------------|
-/// |`as_` |`&self` or &mut self|
-/// |`from_`| none |
-/// |`into_`|`self` |
-/// |`is_` |`&self` or none |
-/// |`to_` |`&self` |
+/// |Prefix |`self` taken |
+/// |-------|----------------------|
+/// |`as_` |`&self` or `&mut self`|
+/// |`from_`| none |
+/// |`into_`|`self` |
+/// |`is_` |`&self` or none |
+/// |`to_` |`&self` |
///
/// **Why is this bad?** Consistency breeds readability. If you follow the conventions, your users won't be surprised that they, e.g., need to supply a mutable reference to a `as_..` function.
///
///
/// **Why is this bad?** Consistency breeds readability. If you follow the conventions, your users won't be surprised that they, e.g., need to supply a mutable reference to a `as_..` function.
/// **Known problems:** Actually *renaming* the function may break clients if the function is part of the public interface. In that case, be mindful of the stability guarantees you've given your users.
///
/// **Example:**
/// **Known problems:** Actually *renaming* the function may break clients if the function is part of the public interface. In that case, be mindful of the stability guarantees you've given your users.