rustdoc: Render private fields in tuple struct as /* private fields */
#110552
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
r? @jsha (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
This looks like a good idea to me. For the test updates: for the tests that aren't intentionally testing the rendering of private fields (e.g. tests/rustdoc/const-generics/const-generic-defaults.rs), we should update the test expectations so they don't make a statement one way or the other about private fields. Since the test expectation is based on substring matching I think it should suffice to remove everything after the |
rust-cloud-vms
bot
force-pushed
the
private-fields
branch
from
9da2bfd to
5f5e6f1
Compare
|
Looks good to me as well. Can you add one test which specifically check the following cases:
please? (I think they cover all possible cases I could think of) Once done, I'll start an FCP to get the approval from the rest of the team since it's a user facing change. |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #112957) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
jsha
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
Just a friendly bump on this. @GuillaumeGomez requested above some additional test cases. And there are a merge conflicts. I think this is a good improvement and it would be nice to get it merged. |
|
don't really have time to update this pr -- would be a good beginner issue tho. |
|
I'll take over as this is a bug fix. |
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2023
…e-struct, r=notriddle rustdoc: Render private fields in tuple struct as `/* private fields */` Reopening of rust-lang#110552. All that was missing was a test for the different cases so I added it into the second commit. Description from the original PR: > I've gotten some feedback that the current rustdoc rendering of... > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields(_); > ``` > > ...is confusing, and I agree with that feedback, especially compared to the field struct case: > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields { /* private fields */ } > ``` > > So this PR makes it so that when all of the fields of a tuple variant are private, just render it with the `/* private fields */` comment. We can't *always* render it like that, for example when there's a mix of private and public fields. cc `@jsha` r? `@notriddle`
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2023
…e-struct, r=notriddle rustdoc: Render private fields in tuple struct as `/* private fields */` Reopening of rust-lang#110552. All that was missing was a test for the different cases so I added it into the second commit. Description from the original PR: > I've gotten some feedback that the current rustdoc rendering of... > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields(_); > ``` > > ...is confusing, and I agree with that feedback, especially compared to the field struct case: > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields { /* private fields */ } > ``` > > So this PR makes it so that when all of the fields of a tuple variant are private, just render it with the `/* private fields */` comment. We can't *always* render it like that, for example when there's a mix of private and public fields. cc ``@jsha`` r? ``@notriddle``
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2023
…e-struct, r=notriddle rustdoc: Render private fields in tuple struct as `/* private fields */` Reopening of rust-lang#110552. All that was missing was a test for the different cases so I added it into the second commit. Description from the original PR: > I've gotten some feedback that the current rustdoc rendering of... > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields(_); > ``` > > ...is confusing, and I agree with that feedback, especially compared to the field struct case: > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields { /* private fields */ } > ``` > > So this PR makes it so that when all of the fields of a tuple variant are private, just render it with the `/* private fields */` comment. We can't *always* render it like that, for example when there's a mix of private and public fields. cc ```@jsha``` r? ```@notriddle```
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2023
…e-struct, r=notriddle rustdoc: Render private fields in tuple struct as `/* private fields */` Reopening of rust-lang#110552. All that was missing was a test for the different cases so I added it into the second commit. Description from the original PR: > I've gotten some feedback that the current rustdoc rendering of... > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields(_); > ``` > > ...is confusing, and I agree with that feedback, especially compared to the field struct case: > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields { /* private fields */ } > ``` > > So this PR makes it so that when all of the fields of a tuple variant are private, just render it with the `/* private fields */` comment. We can't *always* render it like that, for example when there's a mix of private and public fields. cc ````@jsha```` r? ````@notriddle````
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2023
Rollup merge of rust-lang#115604 - GuillaumeGomez:private-fields-tuple-struct, r=notriddle rustdoc: Render private fields in tuple struct as `/* private fields */` Reopening of rust-lang#110552. All that was missing was a test for the different cases so I added it into the second commit. Description from the original PR: > I've gotten some feedback that the current rustdoc rendering of... > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields(_); > ``` > > ...is confusing, and I agree with that feedback, especially compared to the field struct case: > > ``` > struct HasPrivateFields { /* private fields */ } > ``` > > So this PR makes it so that when all of the fields of a tuple variant are private, just render it with the `/* private fields */` comment. We can't *always* render it like that, for example when there's a mix of private and public fields. cc ````@jsha```` r? ````@notriddle````
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I've gotten some feedback that the current rustdoc rendering of...
...is confusing, and I agree with that feedback, especially compared to the field struct case:
So this PR makes it so that when all of the fields of a tuple variant are private, just render it with the
/* private fields */comment. We can't always render it like that, for example when there's a mix of private and public fields.Not sure if this is a worthwhile change, so opening it up for discussion :)