-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
Tracking Issue for rustdoc --test-run-directory
#84674
Comments
Request for StabilizationI opened #103682 with the aim to stabilize this rustdoc flag, primarily to facilitate the cargo SummaryThe This flag is primarily the building block for the With that flag, doctests are handled consistently to unit- and integration tests: They will be compiled relative to the cargo workspace root, but they are run in the crate directory. DocumentationThe flag is currently not documented as part of the unstable rustdoc features. Tests
Unresolved questions
|
@ehuss over in rust-lang/cargo#9427 (comment) expressed agreement to make the However, stabilizing @GuillaumeGomez is there anything I can do to move stabilization (#103682) forward? |
Next step is the FCP. I'll start on the PR. |
cargo test runs doc tests by default and doesn't allow to specify My project uses sqlx which tries to create Instead I expect that the test should stay in the workspace directory and use |
Summary
This is a tracking issue for the
--test-run-directory
flag in rustdoc. This flag changes the directory where doctests are run. This was added to support changing the directory used while runningrustdoc --test
in a Cargo workspace. See rust-lang/cargo#9427 for more information.Unresolved Questions
None at this time.
Implementation history
About tracking issues
Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.
cc @Swatinem
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: