Skip to content

Fix jump to def regression #96636

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

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 7, 2022

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez commented May 2, 2022

#93803 introduced a regression in the "jump to def" feature. This fixes it.

Nice side-effect: it adds a new regression test. :)

I also used this opportunity to add documentation about this unstable feature in the rustdoc book.

Part of #89095.

cc @cjgillot
r? @notriddle

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez added the T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label May 2, 2022
@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label May 2, 2022
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the fix-jump-to-def-regression branch from 6b1fe8d to 3bfa2eb Compare May 6, 2022 20:02
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

I completely removed the function. I extended the test a bit too.

@notriddle
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 6, 2022

📌 Commit 3bfa2eb has been approved by notriddle

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels May 6, 2022
GuillaumeGomez added a commit to GuillaumeGomez/rust that referenced this pull request May 6, 2022
…ession, r=notriddle

Fix jump to def regression

rust-lang#93803 introduced a regression in the "jump to def" feature. This fixes it.

Nice side-effect: it adds a new regression test. :)

I also used this opportunity to add documentation about this unstable feature in the rustdoc book.

cc `@cjgillot`
r? `@notriddle`
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

perhaps caused #96792 to fail? I think that was the only rustdoc related PR in the rollup.

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

No, it's not this one as it doesn't change anything in rustdoc behaviour. I'll take a look at what went wrong.

GuillaumeGomez added a commit to GuillaumeGomez/rust that referenced this pull request May 7, 2022
…ession, r=notriddle

Fix jump to def regression

rust-lang#93803 introduced a regression in the "jump to def" feature. This fixes it.

Nice side-effect: it adds a new regression test. :)

I also used this opportunity to add documentation about this unstable feature in the rustdoc book.

cc `@cjgillot`
r? `@notriddle`
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 7, 2022
…laumeGomez

Rollup of 7 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#96581 (make Size and Align debug-printing a bit more compact)
 - rust-lang#96636 (Fix jump to def regression)
 - rust-lang#96760 (diagnostics: port more diagnostics to derive + add support for `Vec` fields)
 - rust-lang#96788 (Improve validator around field projections and checked bin ops)
 - rust-lang#96805 (Change eslint rules from configuration comments to configuration file)
 - rust-lang#96807 (update Miri)
 - rust-lang#96811 (Fix a minor typo in the description of Formatter)

Failed merges:

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 3346d11 into rust-lang:master May 7, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.62.0 milestone May 7, 2022
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez deleted the fix-jump-to-def-regression branch May 7, 2022 16:26
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants