Skip to content
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

Use missing_docs lint on tuple fields as well #88688

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-lint 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, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. 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-lint 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, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants