Skip to content

Remove weird looking dashes #76849

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

#

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Remove weird looking dashes #76849

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

AMythicDev
Copy link
Contributor

Removed some weird looking dashes from the unstable book. It could look like to a newcomer that someone had made a typo while writing the docs

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @GuillaumeGomez

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 17, 2020
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

I guess it was for "platform-specific" and "feature-specific", but it looked weird. Maybe an english native might have another idea on how to make it look less weird?

cc @rust-lang/docs

@euclio
Copy link
Contributor

euclio commented Sep 17, 2020 •
edited
Loading

"Documenting platform- or feature-specific information" reads well to me.

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

You could also just not refactor

Documenting platform-specific or feature-specific information

@jyn514 jyn514 added A-docs Area: Documentation for any part of the project, including the compiler, standard library, and tools T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Sep 17, 2020
@jyn514
Copy link
Member

jyn514 commented Sep 17, 2020

only tangentially related, but this entire section needs to be rewritten after #73566.

@jyn514
Copy link
Member

jyn514 commented Sep 17, 2020

It should probably be removed from unstable_features too, it's not feature gated so regardless of what the intent is, people can and do use it on all release channels (#75100)

@jyn514
Copy link
Member

jyn514 commented Sep 17, 2020

only tangentially related, but this entire section needs to be rewritten after #73566.

I'll work on this.

@jyn514 jyn514 mentioned this pull request Sep 17, 2020
Merged
@jyn514
Copy link
Member

jyn514 commented Sep 17, 2020

Opened #76855

@AMythicDev
Copy link
Contributor Author

I changed the line for a longer heading

pickfire
pickfire approved these changes Sep 18, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@pickfire pickfire left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me.

@AMythicDev
Copy link
Contributor Author

So let's rollup the PR

@jyn514
Copy link
Member

jyn514 commented Sep 28, 2020

Since this section is undergoing significant changes in #76855, I'm going to close this PR in favor of that one. Thank you for your contribution - I made sure to include it in #76855 :)

@jyn514 jyn514 closed this Sep 28, 2020
jyn514 added a commit to jyn514/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2020
@jyn514
Revamp rustdoc docs about documentation using cfg
dc5a000 
- Move `cfg(doc)` out of `unstable-features`. It's not unstable.
- Remove outdated reference to `everybody_loops`.
- Improve wording in various places
- Give an example of code this allows (and does not allow)
- Link to `cfg(doc)` in `doc(cfg)` documentation. Since one is stable
and the other is not, don't combine them.
- Cleanup wording for `doc(cfg)`
- Incorporate changes from rust-lang#76849
- Mention that `doc(cfg)` is also for features
JohnTitor added a commit to JohnTitor/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 6, 2020
@JohnTitor
Rollup merge of rust-lang#76855 - jyn514:platform-specific, r=ollie27
97ee62c 
Revamp rustdoc docs about documentation using `cfg`

- Move `cfg(doc)` out of `unstable-features`. It's not unstable.
- Remove outdated reference to `everybody_loops`.
- Improve wording in various places
- Give an example of code this allows (and does not allow)
- Link to `cfg(doc)` in `doc(cfg)` documentation. Since one is stable
and the other is not, don't combine them.
- Cleanup wording for `doc(cfg)`
- Incorporate changes from rust-lang#76849
- Mention that `doc(cfg)` is also for features

Addresses rust-lang#76849 (comment).
Obsoletes rust-lang#76849 (I made sure to fix the weird dashes too).
r? @steveklabnik
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Reviewers

@pickfire pickfire pickfire approved these changes

Assignees

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez

Labels
A-docs Area: Documentation for any part of the project, including the compiler, standard library, and tools S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@AMythicDev @rust-highfive @GuillaumeGomez @euclio @steveklabnik @jyn514 @pickfire