reword descriptions of the deprecated int modules

[pitaj]

Based on recommendation by @est31 here: #107587 (comment)

This is meant to make it more clear, when looking at the std or core docs, that these are deprecated modules - not deprecated integer types (a common misunderstanding).

Before:

After:

[rustbot]

r? @thomcc

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[rustbot]

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with @rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs to tag it appropriately. If this PR contains changes to any unstable APIs please edit the PR description to add a link to the relevant API Change Proposal or create one if you haven't already. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

• Stabilizing library features
• Introducing insta-stable changes such as new implementations of existing stable traits on existing stable types
• Introducing new or changing existing unstable library APIs (excluding permanently unstable features / features without a tracking issue)
• Changing public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees
• Changing observable runtime behavior of library APIs

[est31]

Yes, "redundant" is a good choice I think, instead of "deprecated" which we cannot use unless we deprecate.

[pitaj]

Yeah my main reason for not using "deprecated" is because it says it's deprecated right there already.

[thomcc]

Looks great

@bors r+ rollup

[bors]

📌 Commit d105234 has been approved by thomcc

It is now in the queue for this repository.