Rustdoc search: Increase relevance of primitive types #25702
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
There are more possible optimizations left (cached length in loops) as well as some possible bugs (shadowed variables) to fix. This is mostly syntactic.
|
r? @pcwalton (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
|
This is a great idea. What do you think about just a simpler phrase like (primitive type) for the highlight? |
|
@bluss, I like that. Italic, too? |
|
r=me with the (primitive type) hint updated as discussed. |
killercup
force-pushed
the
rustdoc/search-primitives
branch
from
1253c13 to
07b1994
Compare
|
@gankro thanks for the review. This is how it looks now:
|
|
@bors r+ rollup Awesome, thanks! |
|
📌 Commit 07b1994 has been approved by |
killercup
force-pushed
the
rustdoc/search-primitives
branch
from
07b1994 to
ec60d9f
Compare
|
@gankro I think bors picked the commit I just replaced. (Doesn't matter though, I only changed the commit message.) |
|
@bors r- |
|
@bors r+ ec60d |
|
(we'll see if that worked... the PR is certainly still approved in the queue...) |
|
Thanks! :) |
|
Lol I didn't intend the italic. Either works. |
|
I liked the italic, and it's trivial to fiddle with later. |
oli-obk
pushed a commit
to oli-obk/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2015
…, r=Gankro This minimally changes rustdoc's search as described in rust-lang#25167. Additionally, I also cleaned up some parts of the JS code. There is one more change I made: After each result for a primitive type, I added "(Overview of primitive type)". This further differentiates the result from the module (previously, the only difference was that the module's link was blue). I'm not this is the way to go (this seems to be the only place where we do this) and it's no problem for me to remove that commit.  cc @steveklabnik (it concerns docs) and @alexcrichton (who made changes to rustdoc previously)
oli-obk
pushed a commit
to oli-obk/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2015
…, r=Gankro This minimally changes rustdoc's search as described in rust-lang#25167. Additionally, I also cleaned up some parts of the JS code. There is one more change I made: After each result for a primitive type, I added "(Overview of primitive type)". This further differentiates the result from the module (previously, the only difference was that the module's link was blue). I'm not this is the way to go (this seems to be the only place where we do this) and it's no problem for me to remove that commit.  cc @steveklabnik (it concerns docs) and @alexcrichton (who made changes to rustdoc previously)
oli-obk
pushed a commit
to oli-obk/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2015
…, r=Gankro This minimally changes rustdoc's search as described in rust-lang#25167. Additionally, I also cleaned up some parts of the JS code. There is one more change I made: After each result for a primitive type, I added "(Overview of primitive type)". This further differentiates the result from the module (previously, the only difference was that the module's link was blue). I'm not this is the way to go (this seems to be the only place where we do this) and it's no problem for me to remove that commit.  cc @steveklabnik (it concerns docs) and @alexcrichton (who made changes to rustdoc previously)
oli-obk
pushed a commit
to oli-obk/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2015
…, r=Gankro This minimally changes rustdoc's search as described in rust-lang#25167. Additionally, I also cleaned up some parts of the JS code. There is one more change I made: After each result for a primitive type, I added "(Overview of primitive type)". This further differentiates the result from the module (previously, the only difference was that the module's link was blue). I'm not this is the way to go (this seems to be the only place where we do this) and it's no problem for me to remove that commit.  cc @steveklabnik (it concerns docs) and @alexcrichton (who made changes to rustdoc previously)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This minimally changes rustdoc's search as described in #25167.
Additionally, I also cleaned up some parts of the JS code.
There is one more change I made: After each result for a primitive type, I added "(Overview of primitive type)". This further differentiates the result from the module (previously, the only difference was that the module's link was blue). I'm not this is the way to go (this seems to be the only place where we do this) and it's no problem for me to remove that commit.
cc @steveklabnik (it concerns docs) and @alexcrichton (who made changes to rustdoc previously)