-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.1k
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
Implement --check-cfg option (RFC 3013), take 2 #93915
Conversation
I have address all the review comments and added tests for the uncovered error cases. @rustbot ready |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I have fix the last review comments (except for @rustbot ready |
r=me after addressing #93915 (comment) and squashing commits. |
Co-authored-by: Urgau <lolo.branstett@numericable.fr> Co-authored-by: Marcelina Kościelnicka <mwk@0x04.net>
Addressed and squashed, but I don't have bors permissions so I can't r=you. @rustbot ready |
Thanks! |
📌 Commit 3a73ca5 has been approved by |
…askrgr Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#89892 (Suggest `impl Trait` return type when incorrectly using a generic return type) - rust-lang#91675 (Add MemTagSanitizer Support) - rust-lang#92806 (Add more information to `impl Trait` error) - rust-lang#93497 (Pass `--test` flag through rustdoc to rustc so `#[test]` functions can be scraped) - rust-lang#93814 (mips64-openwrt-linux-musl: correct soft-foat) - rust-lang#93847 (kmc-solid: Use the filesystem thread-safety wrapper) - rust-lang#93877 (asm: Allow the use of r8-r14 as clobbers on Thumb1) - rust-lang#93892 (Only mark projection as ambiguous if GAT substs are constrained) - rust-lang#93915 (Implement --check-cfg option (RFC 3013), take 2) - rust-lang#93953 (Add the `known-bug` test directive, use it, and do some cleanup) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
…eGomez Wire up unstable rustc --check-cfg to rustdoc This pull-request wire up the new unstable `--check-cfg` option from `rustc` to `rustdoc` as [requested](rust-lang#93915 (comment)) in the [pull-request](rust-lang#93915) that introduce `--check-cfg`. The motivation was describe in the original PR by `@jyn514` who wrote rust-lang#89346 (comment): > > add plumbing to pass --check-cfg from rustdoc (do we want this one?) > > It would be useful, I think, it catches issues like cfg(doctst) or something (and in general I would like expansion to match rustc as closely as possible).
…eGomez Wire up unstable rustc --check-cfg to rustdoc This pull-request wire up the new unstable `--check-cfg` option from `rustc` to `rustdoc` as [requested](rust-lang#93915 (comment)) in the [pull-request](rust-lang#93915) that introduce `--check-cfg`. The motivation was describe in the original PR by ``@jyn514`` who wrote rust-lang#89346 (comment): > > add plumbing to pass --check-cfg from rustdoc (do we want this one?) > > It would be useful, I think, it catches issues like cfg(doctst) or something (and in general I would like expansion to match rustc as closely as possible).
This pull-request implement RFC 3013: Checking conditional compilation at compile time (rust-lang/rfcs#3013) and is based on the previous attempt #89346 by @mwkmwkmwk that was closed due to inactivity.
I have address all the review comments from the previous attempt and added some more tests.
cc #82450
r? @petrochenkov