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

Inlined documentation reveals private implementors #14586

Closed
alexcrichton opened this issue Jun 1, 2014 · 4 comments · Fixed by #33002
Closed

Inlined documentation reveals private implementors #14586

alexcrichton opened this issue Jun 1, 2014 · 4 comments · Fixed by #33002
Labels
T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Comments

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

For example, NaiveSearcher on the clone page: http://doc.rust-lang.org/std/clone/trait.Clone.html

@lilyball
Copy link
Contributor

lilyball commented Jun 9, 2014

Another example: RcBoxPtr on rc::Weak: http://doc.rust-lang.org/std/rc/struct.Weak.html

Edit: This example no longer reproduces, but @alexcrichton's original one does.

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

Triage: still a problem

@fhartwig
Copy link
Contributor

I'm having a go at fixing this, but I have trouble reproducing it. Does anyone have an example of this problem outside of the standard library?

bors added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 19, 2016
rustdoc: refine cross-crate impl inlining

This changes the current rule that impls within `doc(hidden)` modules aren't inlined, to only inlining impls where the implemented trait and type are reachable in documentation.

fixes #14586
fixes #31948

.. and also applies the reachability checking to cross-crate links.

fixes #28480

r? @alexcrichton
lnicola pushed a commit to lnicola/rust that referenced this issue Aug 29, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants