-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
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
Add missing checks for #[doc(alias = "")] #73721
Comments
We should reject |
Ok, makes sense! Last question: I remember you telling that you'd prefer this check in rustc directly instead of rustdoc. I can move things there, just wanted to check one last time before doing it. |
Yeah, rustc validates some attributes in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/librustc_passes/check_attr.rs and it might make sense to validate the |
…anishearth Move #[doc(alias)] check in rustc Part of rust-lang#73721. r? @ollie27
…anishearth Move #[doc(alias)] check in rustc Part of rust-lang#73721. r? @ollie27
…anishearth Move #[doc(alias)] check in rustc Part of rust-lang#73721. r? @ollie27
…lie27 Doc alias checks: ensure only items appearing in search index can use it Following the discussion in rust-lang#73721, I added checks to ensure that only items appearing in the search are allowed to have doc alias. r? @ollie27
Since #74148 has been merged, we can close this issue. |
We're still not rejecting pub struct Foo;
pub trait Bar {
const BAZ: u8;
}
impl Bar for Foo {
#[doc(alias = "thing")]
const BAZ: u8 = 0;
} |
Ok! Putting #75740 on hold then! |
…st-doc-alias, r=ollie27 Add check for doc alias on assoc const in trait impl Fixes rust-lang#73721. r? @ollie27
…st-doc-alias, r=ollie27 Add check for doc alias on assoc const in trait impl Fixes rust-lang#73721. r? @ollie27
Now that #72780 has been merged, only a few checks remain to be added in order to stabilize this feature.
First, we need to actually perform those checks in the compiler directly instead of rustdoc.
You mentioned other checks too @ollie27 ?
This issue is part of #50146.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: