| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
This adds a new lint to `rustc` that is used in rustdoc when a code
block is empty or cannot be parsed as valid Rust code.
Previously this was unconditionally a warning. As such some
documentation comments were (unknowingly) abusing this to pass despite
the `-Dwarnings` used when compiling `rustc`, this should not be the
case anymore.
|
|
Co-authored-by: Camelid <camelidcamel@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Nemo157 <github@nemo157.com>
|
|
|
|
Right now, rustdoc users have an unpleasant situation: they can either
use the new tool lint names (`rustdoc::non_autolinks`) or they can use
the old names (`non_autolinks`). If they use the tool lints, they get a
hard error on stable compilers, because rustc rejects all tool names it
doesn't recognize. If they use the old name, they get a warning to
rename the lint to the new name. The only way to compile without
warnings is to add `#[allow(renamed_removed_lints)]`, which defeats the
whole point of the change: we *want* people to switch to the new name.
To avoid people silencing the lint and never migrating to the tool lint,
this avoids warning about the old name, while still allowing you to use
the new name. Once the new `rustdoc` tool name makes it to the stable
channel, we can change these lints to warn again.
This adds the new lint functions `register_alias` and `register_ignored`
- I didn't see an existing way to do this.
|
|
When rustdoc lints were changed to be tool lints, the `rustdoc` group
was removed, leading to spurious warnings like
```
warning: unknown lint: `rustdoc`
```
The lint group still worked when rustdoc ran, since rustdoc added the group itself.
This renames the group to `rustdoc::all` for consistency with
`clippy::all` and the rest of the rustdoc lints.
|
|
- Move MISSING_CRATE_LEVEL_DOCS to rustdoc directly
- Update documentation
This also takes the opportunity to make the `no-crate-level-doc-lint`
test more specific.
|
|
- Use `register_renamed` when rustdoc is running so the lint will still
be active and use a structured suggestion
- Test the behavior for rustc, not just for rustdoc (because it differs)
|
|
|
|
|
