Skip to content

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez commented Sep 6, 2021

Since we count them in the rustdoc show-coverage option, I thought it would be logical to throw the error here as well.

What do you think @rust-lang/rustdoc ?

r? @Manishearth

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez added T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. A-lints Area: Lints (warnings about flaws in source code) such as unused_mut. labels Sep 6, 2021
@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 6, 2021
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the missing-docs-tuple-fields branch from 4bf2145 to a13426c Compare September 6, 2021 15:44
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the missing-docs-tuple-fields branch from a13426c to d6f07f8 Compare September 6, 2021 16:06
@jyn514
Copy link
Member

jyn514 commented Sep 6, 2021

This is not a rustdoc change, you need to talk to @rust-lang/lang.

@jyn514 jyn514 added T-lang Relevant to the language team and removed T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Sep 6, 2021
@Manishearth
Copy link
Member

I'm against this change, documenting tuple variant fids is not something that is in the general norm of rust. This lint would create a ton of warnings across projects that would most likely silence it.

It's actually worth considering if rustdoc coverage should be counting tuple field docs , to me this is similar to documenting private stuff: good to do, but not expected.

(Lints are typically a compiler team thing fwiw)

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

Perfect, to be honest I wasn't super happy about this change, I rather change how we count in the coverage. I'll do that instead and close this one. Thanks for the feedback!

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez deleted the missing-docs-tuple-fields branch September 7, 2021 12:07
Manishearth added a commit to Manishearth/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2021
…lds-count, r=Manishearth

Rustdoc coverage fields count

Follow-up of rust-lang#88688.

Instead of requiring enum tuple variant fields and tuple struct fields to be documented, we count them if they are documented, otherwise we don't include them in the count.

r? `@Manishearth`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-lints Area: Lints (warnings about flaws in source code) such as unused_mut. S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-lang Relevant to the language team
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants