Remove the unused-#[doc(hidden)] logic from the unused_attributes lint
#98336
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
rustbot
added
the
T-compiler
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
rustbot
added
A-lints
fmease
changed the title
#[doc(hidden)] logic from the unused_attributes lint#[doc(hidden)] logic from the unused_attributes lint
fmease
changed the title
#[doc(hidden)] logic from the unused_attributes lint#[doc(hidden)] logic from the unused_attributes lint
fmease
force-pushed
the
remove-faulty-doc-hidden-lint
branch
from
c0d3eb9 to
67508f3
Compare
|
Or does this need to be reviewed by T-lang? |
|
cc @GuillaumeGomez @lcnr who approved the original PR that added this lint. nominating for backport consideration so this gets into 1.62 |
compiler-errors
added
the
beta-nominated
|
r=me, code changes look fine but i would like someone with more context about this lint getting added to sign off as well |
|
Isn't it possible to fix the issues rather than entirely removing the check? It provides useful information after all... |
|
i would prefer to remove the check from beta and fix the lint later, so it can properly bake on nightly and beta. |
|
For that we can check whether we're in nightly and only run it in this case, no? |
|
I don't think we typically gate logic like that based on nightly/beta/etc. Seems like a hack, and since this revert PR is very simple, it does not seem warranted. |
|
imo, @fmease can reintroduce this logic in a couple weeks in nightly 1.64, so that it can have plenty of time to surface issues. |
|
Fair enough. Let's approve this revert for the time being even though it makes me sad. Let's hope the upgraded version will soon follow. :) @bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 67508f3 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 22, 2022
Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#97867 (lub: don't bail out due to empty binders) - rust-lang#98099 (interpret: convert_tag_add_extra: allow tagger to raise errors) - rust-lang#98199 (Move some tests to more reasonable directories) - rust-lang#98334 (Add a full regression test for rust-lang#73727) - rust-lang#98336 (Remove the unused-`#[doc(hidden)]` logic from the `unused_attributes` lint) - rust-lang#98344 (This comment is out dated and misleading, the arm is about TAITs) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rustbot
added
the
beta-accepted
ehuss
pushed a commit
to ehuss/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 24, 2022
…t, r=GuillaumeGomez Remove the unused-`#[doc(hidden)]` logic from the `unused_attributes` lint Fixes rust-lang#96890. It was found out that `#[doc(hidden)]` on trait impl items does indeed have an effect on the generated documentation (see the linked issue). In my opinion and the one of [others](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/266220-rustdoc/topic/Validy.20checks.20for.20.60.23.5Bdoc.28hidden.29.5D.60/near/281846219), rustdoc's output is actually a bit flawed in that regard but that should be tracked in a new issue I suppose (I will open an issue for that in the near future). The check was introduced in rust-lang#96008 which is marked to be part of version `1.62` (current `beta`). As far as I understand, this means that **this PR needs to be backported** to `beta` to fix rust-lang#96890 on time. Correct me if I am wrong. CC `@dtolnay` (in case you would like to agree or disagree with my decision to fully remove this check) `@rustbot` label A-lint T-compiler T-rustdoc r? `@rust-lang/compiler`
Merged
ehuss
removed
the
beta-nominated
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 24, 2022
[beta] Beta backports * Remove the unused-#[doc(hidden)] logic from the unused_attributes lint rust-lang#98336 * debuginfo: Fix NatVis for Rc and Arc with unsized pointees. rust-lang#98137 * Revert "remove num_cpus dependency" in rustc and update cargo rust-lang#97911 * Update LLVM submodule rust-lang#97690 * Revert rust-lang#96682. rust-lang#97636 * don't do Sized and other return type checks on RPIT's real type rust-lang#97431 * Temporarily disable submodule archive downloads. rust-lang#98423
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# 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.
Fixes #96890.
It was found out that
#[doc(hidden)]on trait impl items does indeed have an effect on the generated documentation (see the linked issue). In my opinion and the one of others, rustdoc's output is actually a bit flawed in that regard but that should be tracked in a new issue I suppose (I will open an issue for that in the near future).The check was introduced in #96008 which is marked to be part of version
1.62(currentbeta). As far as I understand, this means that this PR needs to be backported tobetato fix #96890 on time. Correct me if I am wrong.CC @dtolnay (in case you would like to agree or disagree with my decision to fully remove this check)
@rustbot label A-lint T-compiler T-rustdoc
r? @rust-lang/compiler