Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

doc(notable_trait) for impls #94904

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

doc(notable_trait) for impls #94904

wants to merge 2 commits into from
+166 −71

Conversation

conradludgate
Copy link
Contributor

#45040 (comment)

Allows the #[doc(notable_trait)] attribute to be used on impls as well as trait definitions.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @joshtriplett

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added the T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Mar 13, 2022
@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Mar 13, 2022
@conradludgate
Copy link
Contributor Author

conradludgate commented Mar 13, 2022 •
edited
Loading

I'm currently running into this issue locally so I'm struggling to test it

Fixed by running ./x.py doc --stage 2

@conradludgate conradludgate mentioned this pull request Mar 13, 2022
Closed
@dtolnay
Copy link
Member

dtolnay commented Mar 18, 2022

r? rust-lang/rustdoc

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 19, 2022

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #95101) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@JohnCSimon JohnCSimon added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Apr 24, 2022
camelid
camelid reviewed Apr 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
library/core/src/fmt/mod.rs Outdated
Comment on lines 2100 to 2264
#[doc(notable_trait)]
impl Write for Formatter<'_> {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm, if we decide to land this, I wonder if we should rename notable_trait to just notable...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That would make sense, since it'll cover notable_trait and notable_impl into one

Copy link

@Antikyth Antikyth Sep 8, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If it were to simply be called notable, I wonder if there would be usefulness in extending it to other areas too... notable fields? Is that useful? I don't know, but maybe it's worth exploring...

Perhaps notable items in e.g. a module would be useful. I have a module defining many structs and enums (100+) that doesn't make sense to split up, I wonder if notability is relevant to that or not.

@Dylan-DPC
Copy link
Member

@conradludgate if you can resolve the conflicts we can get this merged

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 21, 2022

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #97239) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@JohnCSimon
Copy link
Member

ping from triage:
@conradludgate - looks like this is ready for review

FYI: when a PR is ready for review, send a message containing
@rustbot ready to switch to S-waiting-on-review so the PR is in the reviewer's backlog, else it sits idle.

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jun 19, 2022
@JohnCSimon JohnCSimon added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jul 24, 2022
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

Closing in favor of #94909, since that says it is a successor to this PR.

@conradludgate
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing in favor of #94909, since that says it is a successor to this PR.

Sorry, That's not what I meant by successor - I meant this PR is a dependency

@jyn514 jyn514 reopened this Jul 24, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 29, 2022

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #102384) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@Dylan-DPC Dylan-DPC added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Feb 22, 2023
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Feb 22, 2023

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with @rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs to tag it appropriately. If this PR contains changes to any unstable APIs please edit the PR description to add a link to the relevant API Change Proposal or create one if you haven't already. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

  • Stabilizing library features
  • Introducing insta-stable changes such as new implementations of existing stable traits on existing stable types
  • Introducing new or changing existing unstable library APIs (excluding permanently unstable features / features without a tracking issue)
  • Changing public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees
  • Changing observable runtime behavior of library APIs

@conradludgate
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Feb 22, 2023
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@pitaj
Copy link
Contributor

pitaj commented Apr 30, 2023

@GuillaumeGomez ping from triage

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

There is still https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/94904/files#r857187754. But also, cc @rust-lang/rustdoc. In any case it'll require to go through an FCP.

@pitaj pitaj added the needs-fcp This change is insta-stable, so needs a completed FCP to proceed. label Apr 30, 2023
@pitaj
Copy link
Contributor

pitaj commented Apr 30, 2023

Are you implying that this is waiting for the author to implement the change to just notable? Or do you mean that a decision there still needs to be reached?

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

I think it'd be better to have the team saying it's ok for the renaming, then the code update and finally the FCP.

@pitaj pitaj added the S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label). label Apr 30, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 10, 2023

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #94748) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 17, 2023

Some changes occurred in src/librustdoc/clean/types.rs

cc @camelid

Some changes occurred in src/tools/rust-analyzer

cc @rust-lang/rust-analyzer

Some changes occurred in HTML/CSS/JS.

cc @GuillaumeGomez, @jsha

@conradludgate
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have rebased to resolve conflicts. I tentatively renamed the attribute but haven't touched the feature name.

@lnicola
Copy link
Member

lnicola commented Oct 17, 2023 •
edited
Loading

The RA changes don't look particularly problematic (this time), but we prefer having them merged through the RA upstream when possible (i.e. when they're not necessary to keep the code building or running). That file is generated automatically, and this can make synchronizing the subtree really annoying.

@conradludgate
Copy link
Contributor Author

I wasn't sure about the RA stuff. I mostly did a find-replace and then cleaned up all the changes. I'll remove those changes from the commit then, thanks for letting me know

@conradludgate conradludgate force-pushed the rustdoc-notable-attr branch 2 times, most recently from 2033e9d to 5c8173c Compare October 17, 2023 11:49
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@notriddle
Copy link
Contributor

I don't have a strong opinion on renaming it, but I am in favor of allowing individual impls to be marked as notable.

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 25, 2023

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #117180) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@Dylan-DPC Dylan-DPC removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 20, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Antikyth Antikyth Antikyth left review comments

@camelid camelid camelid left review comments

Assignees

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez

Labels
needs-fcp This change is insta-stable, so needs a completed FCP to proceed. S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label). T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.