-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
Fix invalid src url #37727
Fix invalid src url #37727
Conversation
@@ -550,15 +550,15 @@ macro_rules! unimplemented { | |||
/// into libsyntax itself. | |||
/// | |||
/// For more information, see documentation for `std`'s macros. | |||
#[cfg(dox)] | |||
pub mod builtin { | |||
mod builtin { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks wrong, doesn't removing pub
affect the docs? I could be wrong though.
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit 248a3d9 has been approved by |
Fix invalid src url Fixes rust-lang#37684. Thanks to @eddyb's help. r? @eddyb
Rollup of 30 pull requests - Successful merges: #37190, #37368, #37481, #37503, #37527, #37535, #37551, #37584, #37600, #37613, #37615, #37659, #37662, #37669, #37682, #37688, #37690, #37692, #37693, #37694, #37695, #37696, #37698, #37699, #37705, #37708, #37709, #37716, #37724, #37727 - Failed merges: #37640, #37689, #37717
rustdoc: link to cross-crate sources directly. Fixes #37684 by implementing proper support for getting the `Span` of definitions across crates. In rustdoc this is used to generate direct links to the original source instead of fragile redirects. This functionality could be expanded further for making error reporting code more uniform and seamless across crates, although at the moment there is no actual source to print, only file/line/column information. Closes #37870 which is also "fixes" #37684 by throwing away the builtin macro docs from libcore. After this lands, #37727 could be reverted, although it doesn't matter much either way.
Reviewing for backport I don't understand why this patch fixes the linked issue. What is the effect of this patch? |
Please review for backport. |
@brson This patch avoids an item (the @rust-lang/tools Any objections to backporting this workaround? |
Yeah this seems fine to backport. |
Thanks for the explanation @eddyb. Thanks @GuillaumeGomez . |
Fixes #37684.
Thanks to @eddyb's help.
r? @eddyb