Empty docs

[lucarlig]

Fixes #9931

changelog: [empty_doc]: Detects documentation that is empty.
changelog: Doc comment lints now trigger for struct field and enum variant documentation

[rustbot]

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @llogiq (or someone else) some time within the next two weeks.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information. Namely, in order to ensure the minimum review times lag, PR authors and assigned reviewers should ensure that the review label (S-waiting-on-review and S-waiting-on-author) stays updated, invoking these commands when appropriate:

• @rustbot author: the review is finished, PR author should check the comments and take action accordingly
• @rustbot review: the author is ready for a review, this PR will be queued again in the reviewer's queue

[rustbot]

There are merge commits (commits with multiple parents) in your changes. We have a no merge policy so these commits will need to be removed for this pull request to be merged.

You can start a rebase with the following commands:

$ # rebase
$ git rebase -i master
$ # delete any merge commits in the editor that appears
$ git push --force-with-lease

The following commits are merge commits:

• 40f3102
• e6c20e5

[lucarlig]

Not sure why the tests are failing, I haven’t contributed much maybe I could add suggestions as well

[llogiq]

The code mostly looks ok, though I'd like more tests and more explanation with regards to the implementation choices.

[bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #12259) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[GuillaumeGomez]

Mostly cleanup remaining but looks like you're almost done. 👍

[GuillaumeGomez]

Looks good to me. One thing to note is some doc lints will be triggered on variants struct fields whereas they were not before.

[lucarlig]

Looks good to me. One thing to note is some doc lints will be triggered on variants struct fields whereas they were not before.

yeah I know, I was wondering if it was worth opening an issue to ensure that these cases are tested and working as intended. Probably all doc lints should apply to variants and fields, not only the ones in check_epxr.

[llogiq]

This looks much better. I have a small documentation nit, and we should amend the changelog. Otherwise this is ready to merge.

[llogiq]

Thank you!

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit fca77c0 has been approved by llogiq

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit fca77c0 with merge 1c50948...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test
Approved by: llogiq
Pushing 1c50948 to master...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test
Approved by: llogiq
Pushing 1c50948 to master...

[bors]

👀 Test was successful, but fast-forwarding failed: 422 Changes must be made through a pull request.