Rollup of 8 pull requests #31370
Merged
Rollup of 8 pull requests #31370
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Any documentation comments that contain raw-string-looking sequences may pretty-print invalid code when expanding them, as the current logic always uses the `r"literal"` form, without appending any `#`s. This commit calculates the minimum number of `#`s required to wrap a comment correctly and appends `#`s appropriately. Fixes rust-lang#27489.
ConstnessSpace has no knowledge of the type of item it's modifying, so hide the constness a level up.
This is a behavior that some find confusing, so it deserves its own example. Fixes rust-lang#31318
The context of the link is `Result` but it points to the docs on `Option`'s `expect`.
…nikomatsakis Any documentation comments that contain raw-string-looking sequences may pretty-print invalid code when expanding them, as the current logic always uses the `r"literal"` form, without appending any `#`s. This commit calculates the minimum number of `#`s required to wrap a comment correctly and appends `#`s appropriately. Fixes rust-lang#27489.
Fixes rust-lang#30632 I'm not sure if this explanation is good enough. If it is, I will add it to filter as well.
… r=alexcrichton Fixes rust-lang#31098 AFAICT this is the only place where rustdoc explicitly checks if we are on stable before emitting content, so I can't tell if this is the sane way to handle this, or if anything else should be done to make sure that nobody forgets to remove this check when `const` is stabilized.
Small modification to rust-lang#31288. Shows full path and line number for unused error codes.
This is a behavior that some find confusing, so it deserves its own example. Fixes rust-lang#31318 I think this wording might be a bit strange, but I couldn't come up with anything better. Feedback very welcome.
The context of the link is `Result` but it points to the docs on `Option`'s `expect`.
|
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
|
@bors r+ p=10 |
|
📌 Commit 1a21dab has been approved by |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 3, 2016
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.
#s when expanding documentation comments #27499, Discuss pitfalls of stateful closures with Map #31220, Don't showconstin docs when it's not available #31329, show location of unused error codes #31332, Fix E0118 #31347, Further explain take_while #31351, Explain behavior of _ #31352, Fix reference toexpect#31366