rustdoc: Make "rust code block is empty" and "could not parse code block" warnings a lint (INVALID_RUST_CODEBLOCKS)#84587
Conversation
|
r? @CraftSpider (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
ec10728 to
6d22485
Compare
6d22485 to
7f4d732
Compare
|
I don't see a test for the actual empty block case, could you add one? Otherwise looks generally good, given that I'm not super familiar with the lint system. |
It already exists: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/7f4d7327da6dbec5958d144a12e2e4709ebcbfc1/src/test/rustdoc-ui/invalid-syntax.stderr#L105-L111 Err ... actually I don't think there was ever an FCP in #79816. Also the lint name should be plural, not singular. I'll start FCP once I rename it. |
|
@rfcbot fcp merge This adds a new lint I'm open to renaming the lint, but I do think changing these from a warning to a lint is the right decision. |
|
Team member @jyn514 has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members: No concerns currently listed. Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me. |
INVALID_RUST_CODEBLOCKS)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there an existing issue about this not pointing to the span that contains the error? Would be nice to fix in the future.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why was this behavior changed in this PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The note just moved below the help, it wasn't attached to the correct span before either.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it wasn't attached to the correct span before either.
Ah, I see 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why was this behavior changed in this PR?
|
@rfcbot reviewed I agree with making this a lint, but why was #84587 (comment) changed in this PR? I would prefer it to be a separate change. |
|
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
…pider rustdoc: Make "rust code block is empty" and "could not parse code block" warnings a lint (`INVALID_RUST_CODEBLOCKS`) Fixes rust-lang#79792. This already went through FCP in rust-lang#79816, so it only needs final review. This is mostly a rebase of rust-lang#79816 - thank you `@poliorcetics` for doing most of the work!
…pider rustdoc: Make "rust code block is empty" and "could not parse code block" warnings a lint (`INVALID_RUST_CODEBLOCKS`) Fixes rust-lang#79792. This already went through FCP in rust-lang#79816, so it only needs final review. This is mostly a rebase of rust-lang#79816 - thank you ``@poliorcetics`` for doing most of the work!
|
I think it'll need to be rebased: |
|
@bors r- |
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.
This also gives a better error message when a span is missing.
- Simplify boolean expression - Give an example of invalid syntax - Remove explanation of why code block is text
0511ba4 to
6b92f2e
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
6b92f2e to
587c504
Compare
|
@bors r=CraftSpider |
|
📌 Commit 587c504 has been approved by |
…pider rustdoc: Make "rust code block is empty" and "could not parse code block" warnings a lint (`INVALID_RUST_CODEBLOCKS`) Fixes rust-lang#79792. This already went through FCP in rust-lang#79816, so it only needs final review. This is mostly a rebase of rust-lang#79816 - thank you `@poliorcetics` for doing most of the work!
…laumeGomez Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#84587 (rustdoc: Make "rust code block is empty" and "could not parse code block" warnings a lint (`INVALID_RUST_CODEBLOCKS`)) - rust-lang#85280 (Toggle-wrap items differently than top-doc.) - rust-lang#85338 (Implement more Iterator methods on core::iter::Repeat) - rust-lang#85339 (Report an error if a lang item has the wrong number of generic arguments) - rust-lang#85369 (Suggest borrowing if a trait implementation is found for &/&mut <type>) - rust-lang#85393 (Suppress spurious errors inside `async fn`) - rust-lang#85415 (Clean up remnants of BorrowOfPackedField) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Fixes #79792. This already went through FCP in #79816, so it only needs final review.
This is mostly a rebase of #79816 - thank you @poliorcetics for doing most of the work!