-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 13.9k
rustdoc-json: Add test for keywords with --document-private-items
#125503
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
Conversation
|
Nice! Do you think it'd be worth adding documentation about this in |
|
I don't think so. We already document the |
|
Then sounds all good to me, thanks! r=me once CI pass |
|
@bors r=GuillaumeGomez rollup |
…iaskrgr Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#125467 (Only suppress binop error in favor of semicolon suggestion if we're in an assignment statement) - rust-lang#125483 (compiler: validate.rs belongs next to what it validates) - rust-lang#125485 (Migrate `run-make/rustdoc-with-output-dir-option` to `rmake.rs`) - rust-lang#125497 (Fix some SIMD intrinsics documentation) - rust-lang#125501 (Resolve anon const's parent predicates to direct parent instead of opaque's parent) - rust-lang#125503 (rustdoc-json: Add test for keywords with `--document-private-items`) - rust-lang#125519 (tag more stuff with `WG-trait-system-refactor`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Rollup merge of rust-lang#125503 - aDotInTheVoid:rdj-keyword-attr, r=GuillaumeGomez rustdoc-json: Add test for keywords with `--document-private-items` Turns out this does work as-expected. I was worried that the rustdoc's clean would produce a `ItemKind::KeywordItem` for the module, and loose the module itself. But turns out we get this right. Prompted by [this discussion on zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/266220-t-rustdoc/topic/Where.20to.20find.20keyword.20entries.20in.20JSON.20rustdoc) r? `@GuillaumeGomez`
Turns out this does work as-expected. I was worried that the rustdoc's clean would produce a
ItemKind::KeywordItemfor the module, and loose the module itself. But turns out we get this right.Prompted by this discussion on zulip
r? @GuillaumeGomez