Ignore fewer doc-tests #682
Conversation
|
r? @kbknapp (yo-bot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
tormol
force-pushed
the
ignore_less_doctests
branch
3 times, most recently
from
094aa87
to
d0ba999
Compare
| wrap_help = ["libc", "term_size"] | ||
| lints = ["clippy", "nightly"] | ||
| nightly = [] # for building with nightly and unstable features |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should keep nightly in order to differentiate between "clap unstable features (can sometimes build on stable Rust)" and "Rust unstable features, requires nightly compiler"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Forgot to at-mention your name 😉
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I get the difference now, and also realize that removing a feature flag is a breaking.
Due to the feature name i assumed clap_app! required a nightly compiler.
I got a notification for the first comment, but I haven't had time to respond.
tormol
force-pushed
the
ignore_less_doctests
branch
from
d0ba999
to
7d4dd45
Compare
Removing an unused import is the only visible change.
else you get another warning!
* InvalidSubcommand requires feature="suggestions". * UnknownArgument can also be caused by unrecognized subcommands.
Also adds a blank line between variants and wraps markdown lines at punctuation when it makes sense. (Doesn't affect generated docs)
* Clap has dependencies even with all features disabled. * The "nightly" feature does nothing, so don't mention it. * Explain the difference between "unstable" and "nightly" better. * Split features into groups (default, opt-in, clap-development). * For contributors: update what tests should be run, and remove make command. * Removes a repeated word and splits up some long markdown lines. Also groups features by category and dependencies by feature in Cargo.toml.
tormol
force-pushed
the
ignore_less_doctests
branch
from
7d4dd45
to
4ee85b9
Compare
|
Done. |
|
You're right. But I go back and forth about using a single rebased history, vs branching....I guess I could just start merging without worry about it since the history is already soup 😜 @homu r+ |
|
📌 Commit 4ee85b9 has been approved by |
|
☀️ Test successful - status |
|
Github also required an update, which is what I don't understand. EDIT: It was probably just a warning/notice that I hadn't seen before. |
No description provided.