doc: CSS improvements #10849
doc: CSS improvements #10849
Conversation
Now with broader compatibility.
|
Do you have a preview of that the CSS changes look like? |
|
@alexcrichton Yes, I've updated my copy. |
|
When I added backgrounds to the titles, it was to improve readability. I do not think the underlines work as well. Either way, the new heading padding looks bad. |
|
@SiegeLord I do think we shouldn't put too much emphasis on titles, it interferes with the actual content. Also titles with background make too much clutter esp. when you have lots of titles with not so much content. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not set on that formatting, just thought about moving on from what we have now. Have any suggestion for the paddings? Thought it looked good that way. Lower elements (h4+) are just underlined and have less padding so that it looks smaller without putting too much offset. |
|
cc @brson |
|
Maybe a Godoc-like style should be able to put a discrete emphasis on the titles. |
|
@adridu59 Thanks! I like that this makes the home page and the docs more consistent. Let's keep iterating. |
|
Oh right pandoc's too old for the toc-depth switch. |
|
Commited rust-lang/prev.rust-lang.org@9bda6bc as a bonus. |
rustdoc: - fix search-bar layout doc: CSS: - switch to native pandoc toc depth - rm some dead code - clamp width to be readable (we're not Wikipedia!) - don't background-color titles, it's bloating - make syntax-highlighting colors inline with rust-lang.org - space indents @alexcrichton
Remove lint name and category fields from the new lint issue form changelog: none Picking a name/category is something the implementers/reviewers tend to cover anyway, I think asking people to come up with it at the time of their suggestion is more of a barrier than it's worth Inspired by the mention in rust-lang#10849
new lint: `implied_bounds_in_impls` Closes rust-lang#10849 A new lint that looks for explicitly specified bounds that are already implied by other bounds in `impl Trait` return position types. One example, as shown in the linked example, would be ```rs fn foo<T>(x: T) -> impl Deref<Target = T> + DerefMut<Target = T> { Box::new(x) } ``` `DerefMut<Target = T>` requires `Deref<Target = T>` to be wellformed, so specifying `Deref` there is unnecessary. This currently "ignores" (i.e., does not lint at all) transitive supertrait bounds (e.g. `trait A {} trait B: A {} trait C: B {}`, then having an `impl A + C` type), because that seems a bit more difficult and I think this isn't technically a blocker. It leads to FNs, but shouldn't bring any FPs changelog: new lint [`implied_bounds_in_impls`]
rustdoc:
doc: CSS:
@alexcrichton