-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Create rustdoc_internals feature gate #90420
Create rustdoc_internals feature gate #90420
Conversation
(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
r? @camelid |
This seems ... kind of unnecessary to me? We can document on the tracking issues that these aren't meant to be stabilized, I don't think it also needs to be in the source code of everything using them. And as you've noticed the logic for |
The standard library often uses the naming convention of If merging the feature gates would be too complicated, I'm okay to leave them separate, but I would prefer to merge them and make it clear in the name that they are internal-only.
They're only used in the standard library and rustdoc IIUC, and this would reduce the number of feature gates necessary? |
Hmm, ok, seems reasonable. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
e2a9da8
to
10039e2
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
10039e2
to
dc4ab79
Compare
src/test/ui/feature-gates/feature-gate-rustdoc_internals.stderr
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
dc4ab79
to
081e0cf
Compare
Updated the message and set the PR as ready to review. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
081e0cf
to
e8a9813
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
e8a9813
to
bcd821e
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
bcd821e
to
987b6da
Compare
6041272
to
ce7f8a0
Compare
Done! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Left a few comments. r=me after fixing those.
compiler/rustc_feature/src/active.rs
Outdated
/// Allows using internal rustdoc features like `doc(primitive)` or `doc(keyword)`. | ||
(active, rustdoc_internals, "1.58.0", Some(90418), None), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is in the wrong section; it should be next to doc_notable_trait.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also, can you create an actual tracking issue? We shouldn't just link to this PR.
/// Allows using `#[doc(keyword = "...")]`. | ||
(removed, doc_keyword, "1.28.0", Some(51315), None, | ||
Some("merged into `#![feature(rustdoc_internals)]`")), | ||
/// Allows using doc(primitive) without a future-incompat warning |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit:
/// Allows using doc(primitive) without a future-incompat warning | |
/// Allows using `doc(primitive)` without a future-incompat warning |
ce7f8a0
to
5dbcc0c
Compare
It does link to the tracking issue. Unless I missed something? Otherwise, I updated following your comments. |
Sorry, maybe GitHub glitched and showed me the wrong page. Tracking issue looks good to me. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
r=me with these two comments fixed
5dbcc0c
to
9447d1f
Compare
@camelid Your comments made perfect sense (and I have no clue how I messed up the indent...). Updated! |
Thanks! @bors r+ rollup |
📌 Commit 9447d1f has been approved by |
…ature, r=camelid Create rustdoc_internals feature gate As suggested by `@camelid` [here](rust-lang#90398 (comment)), since `doc_keyword` and `doc_primitive` aren't meant to be stabilized, we could put them behind a same feature flag. This is pretty much what it would look like (needs to update the tests too). The tracking issue is rust-lang#90418. What do you think `@rust-lang/rustdoc` ?
…laumeGomez Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#89542 (Partially stabilize `duration_consts_2`) - rust-lang#90044 (Restrict aarch64 outline atomics to glibc for now.) - rust-lang#90420 (Create rustdoc_internals feature gate) - rust-lang#91075 (Reduce prominence of item-infos) - rust-lang#91151 (Fix test in std::process on android) - rust-lang#91179 (Fix more <a> color) - rust-lang#91199 (rustdoc: Add test for mixing doc comments and attrs) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
As suggested by @camelid here, since
doc_keyword
anddoc_primitive
aren't meant to be stabilized, we could put them behind a same feature flag.This is pretty much what it would look like (needs to update the tests too).
The tracking issue is #90418.
What do you think @rust-lang/rustdoc ?