| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|
On later stages, the feature is already stable.
Result of running:
rg -l "feature.let_else" compiler/ src/librustdoc/ library/ | xargs sed -s -i "s#\\[feature.let_else#\\[cfg_attr\\(bootstrap, feature\\(let_else\\)#"
|
|
|
|
This reverts commit 326646074940222d602f3683d0559088690830f4.
This is the revert against master, the beta revert was already done in #100538.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If an internal lint uses `typeck_results` or similar queries then that
can result in rustdoc checking code that it shouldn't (e.g. from other
platforms) and emit compilation errors.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
|
|
|
|
This is no longer used only for debugging options (e.g. `-Zoutput-width`, `-Zallow-features`).
Rename it to be more clear.
|
|
Rename the `--output-width` flag to `--diagnostic-width` as this appears
to be the preferred name within the compiler team.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
|
|
Rename the `--terminal-width` flag to `--output-width` as the behaviour
doesn't just apply to terminals (and so is slightly less accurate).
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
|
|
Formerly `-Zterminal-width`, `--terminal-width` allows the user or build
tool to inform rustc of the width of the terminal so that diagnostics
can be truncated.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
|
|
Fix bug in `rustdoc -Whelp`
Previously, this printed the debugging options, not the lint options,
and only handled `-Whelp`, not `-A/-D/-F`.
This also fixes a few other misc issues:
- Fix `// check-stdout` for UI tests; previously it only worked for run-fail and compile-fail tests
- Add lint headers for tool lints, not just builtin lints
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/98533#issuecomment-1172004197
r? ```@GuillaumeGomez```
|
|
Previously, this printed the debugging options, not the lint options,
and only handled `-Whelp`, not `-A/-D/-F`.
This also fixes a few other misc issues:
- Fix `// check-stdout` for UI tests; previously it only worked for run-fail and compile-fail tests
- Add lint headers for tool lints, not just builtin lints
- Remove duplicate run-make test
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Include nonexported macro_rules! macros in the doctest target
Fixes #88038
This PR aims to include nonexported `macro_rules!` macros in the doctest target. For more details, please see the above issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
private module
|
|
There are a few places were we have to construct it, though, and a few
places that are more invasive to change. To do this, we create a
constructor with a long obvious name.
|
|
Support GATs in Rustdoc
Implements:
1. Rendering GATs in trait definitions and impl blocks
2. Rendering GATs in types (e.g. in the return type of a function)
Fixes #92341
This is my first rustdoc PR, so I have absolutely no idea how to produce tests for this. Advice from the rustdoc team would be wonderful!
I tested locally and things looked correct:

|
|
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 4 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #93850 (Don't ICE when an extern static is too big for the current architecture)
- #94154 (Wire up unstable rustc --check-cfg to rustdoc)
- #94353 (Fix debug_assert in unused lint pass)
- #94366 (Add missing item to release notes)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
Wire up unstable rustc --check-cfg to rustdoc
This pull-request wire up the new unstable `--check-cfg` option from `rustc` to `rustdoc` as [requested](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93915#discussion_r807560445) in the [pull-request](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93915) that introduce `--check-cfg`.
The motivation was describe in the original PR by ``@jyn514`` who wrote https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89346#issuecomment-930129761:
> > add plumbing to pass --check-cfg from rustdoc (do we want this one?)
>
> It would be useful, I think, it catches issues like cfg(doctst) or something (and in general I would like expansion to match rustc as closely as possible).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass `--test` flag through rustdoc to rustc so `#[test]` functions can be scraped
As a part of stabilizing the scrape examples extension in Cargo, I uncovered a bug where examples cannot be scraped from tests. See this test: https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/10343/files#diff-27aa4f012ebfebaaee61498d91d2370de460628405d136b05e77efe61e044679R2496
The issue is that when rustdoc is run on a test file, because `--test` is not passed as a rustc option, then functions annotated with `#[test]` are ignored by the compiler. So this PR changes rustdoc so when `--test` is passed in conjunction with a `--scrape-example-<suffix>` flag, then the `test` field of `rustc_interface::Config` is true.
r? `@camelid`
|
|
1. It captured stdout and not stderr
2. It isn't used anywhere
3. All error messages should go to the DiagnosticOutput instead
4. It modifies thread local state
|
|
This ensures that it is called even when run_in_thread_pool_with_globals
is avoided and reduces code duplication between the parallel and
non-parallel version of run_in_thread_pool_with_globals
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rustdoc: remove ListAttributesIter and use impl Iterator instead
This is a continuation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/92227.
I found that `ListAttributesIter` did not optimize well and replacing it with a simple `impl Iterator` resulted in 1-3 % instruction count wins locally.
Because I needed to use `impl Iterator` on a slice of AST attributes, I had to implement it using GAT + impl trait. I also have a version without GAT [here](https://github.com/Kobzol/rust/commit/5470e2a65cbd3086d19f0847f44ca9cbbc049689), if GATs are not welcome in rustdoc :D Locally it resulted in equal performance numbers.
Can I ask for a perf. run? Thanks.
r? rust-lang/rustdoc
|
|
rustdoc: remove hand-rolled isatty
This PR replaces bindings to the platform-specific isatty APIs with the `isatty` crate, as done elsewhere in the repository.
|
|
|
|
Also ignore clippy's "collapsible if..." lints.
|
|
|
|
resolution and later passes
|
|
|
|
r=alexcrichton
Remove useless `#[global_allocator]` from rustc and rustdoc.
This was added in #83152, which has several errors in its comments.
This commit also fix up the comments, which are quite wrong and
misleading.
r? `@alexcrichton`
|
|
This was added in #83152, which has several errors in its comments.
This commit also fix up the comments, which are quite wrong and
misleading.
|
|
- flags no longer function, see #44136
- adjust tests to match new behavior
- removed test issue-42875 (covered regression with --no-defaults)
- moved input-format to removed flags
- move all removed flags to bottom
- note flag removal in command help
- remove DefaultPassOption enum (now redundant with `show_coverage`)
|
|
Signed-off-by: hi-rustin <rustin.liu@gmail.com>
|