Change all bug ID to links

[Geod24]

Context: There has been work done to move towards Github, but concerns have been raised that it would make issue number ambiguous. In order to avoid this undesirable side effect, this PR converts most issue number (I might have missed a few, but I doubt that there's many) into HTTP links.

See also: dlang/project-ideas#43
CC @CyberShadow @WalterBright

[dlang-bot]

Thanks for your pull request, @Geod24!

Bugzilla references

Auto-close	Bugzilla	Severity	Description
✗	5710	normal	cannot use delegates as parameters to non-global template

Testing this PR locally

If you don't have a local development environment setup, you can use Digger to test this PR:

dub run digger -- build "master + phobos#7441"

[CyberShadow]

I feel like such large changes should be held off until we definitely know for sure that 1) we want to move to GitHub and 2) we cannot preserve issue numbers while doing so.

[wilzbach]

In either way this is a very welcome change. Thanks a lot!
BTW for DMD Walter enforces that issues can only be referenced by links stricter and I do believe the same reasoning (clickable, unmistakable references) applies here as well.

[CyberShadow]

and I do believe the same reasoning (clickable, unmistakable references) applies here as well.

Good point.

"A message or commit OID is required to dismiss a review"

[Geod24]

Fixed the style issue.
Indeed should have mentioned the precedent set by Walter: dlang/dmd#6775

[burner]

Very boring work, I like it

[Geod24]

So... Can we move forward with this before it becomes stale ?

[CyberShadow]

Thank you! This looks like a lot of tedious work.

[schveiguy]

So far, still looking, I'll leave as a comment because technically, the original was wrong, but an invalid url sucks more than a number.

[Geod24]

Added a commit to correct the issue number, thanks @MoonlightSentinel

[Geod24]

@schveiguy : Thanks for doing that tedious review! LMK when you're done, I'll fix and reapply auto-merge.

[CyberShadow]

I suggest sending follow-up fixes as new PRs to avoid retriggering the CIs and increasing the chances of merge failures.

[schveiguy]

I agree, just merge this. I'm 37/69 files reviewed. Anything I find can be fixed in a smaller update.

Thanks for doing that tedious review!

Some of it github makes easy by highlighting just the changed portions of a line, and of course being able to mark files as viewed. But this doesn't compare to the tediousness of actually making this fix. Thanks!

[schveiguy]

Done the review, let's merge and then do fixups after.

[schveiguy]

A recommendation for future similar PRs, to make this much easier to review -- One commit that simply replaces the number with the link. No format editing, no removals of outdated anything. Just a simple replacement. This enables one to review simply that the numbers are not changed (that was my main focus). Github makes this easy by highlighting the only the changed portion of the text. Then more commits to fix the formatting, etc.

[Geod24]

Right. I originally didn't expect it to be so big, but after the initial (scripted) madness, I realized that the style was wildly inconsistent (e.g. references used as well as how things were organized) and had to go in manually and fix tons of stuff.
For reference, there was an unavoidable amount of stylistic changes needed, because the style linter complains about long lines (triggered by @some_attributes unittest // here goes the long URL and some description) and some patterns, e.g. it enforces allman but relies on { being at EOL to allow void foo() { }. But this also allow void foo() { // Oops.

But point taken, I'll keep the future changes much shorter.

[Geod24]

Followed up on: #7446
Thanks for the careful review!

[schveiguy]

You may misunderstand, I mean separate the adding of the urls from the formatting in 2 commits, not 2 PRs. This shouldn't affect the style checker.