Updated Destructors (rest)

Destructors.rest

@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ proc's body. The compiler will use a dataflow analysis to prove this fact.
 For a ``sink`` parameter called ``sp`` a **consume** looks like:
 
 .. code-block:: nim
+
   proc consume(c: var Container; sp: sink T) =
     locationDerivedFrom(c) = sp
 
@@ -41,6 +42,7 @@ This assignment is mapped to the ``=sink`` operator.
 A consume can also be forwarded, "pass sp to a different proc as a sink parameter":
 
 .. code-block:: nim
+
   proc consume(c: var Container; sp: sink T) =
     c.takeAsSink(sp)
 
@@ -53,6 +55,7 @@ and the compiler tries to prove that it is not used again afterwards. For
 local variables this is quite easy to prove:
 
 .. code-block:: nim
+
   proc consume(c: var Container; element: sink T) =
     c[i] = element
 
@@ -153,6 +156,7 @@ Rule         Pattern                         Transformed into
 ``sink T`` also affects overloading resolution rules; by the time type checking is performed we have no control flow graph yet so the property ``lastReadOf z`` is not available. However, passing a call expression ``f()`` to a ``g`` taking a sink parameter is a syntactic property and so is available for overloading resolution. Thus I propose the following rule:
 
 .. code-block:: nim
+
   proc add(c: var Container; x: T) # version A
   proc add(c: var Container; x: sink T) # version B