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

jsondocck: Parse, don't validate commands. #133478

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 10, 2024
Merged

Conversation

aDotInTheVoid
Copy link
Member

Centralizes knowledge of jsondocck syntax into the parser, so the checker doesn't need to know what the indexes are.

Vaguely related zulip discussion

I'm very happy this is negative LoC, despite adding a big, documented enum!

r? @fmease

@rustbot rustbot added A-rustdoc-json Area: Rustdoc JSON backend S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Nov 25, 2024
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Question (I'm not a rustdoc reviewer): does this have any tests?

Copy link
Member

@fmease fmease Dec 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nope, no self tests yet for either JsonDocCk or HtmlDocCk. That's a long term plan of mine though (next to documenting their directives in the rustc-dev-guide (which should happen much sooner 🤞)).

Copy link
Member

@fmease fmease left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for doing this! I have some suggestions but otherwise looks good :)

src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
src/tools/jsondocck/src/main.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
@fmease fmease added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Dec 7, 2024
@aDotInTheVoid
Copy link
Member Author

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Dec 9, 2024
@fmease
Copy link
Member

fmease commented Dec 9, 2024

@bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 9, 2024

📌 Commit e6bc427 has been approved by fmease

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Dec 9, 2024
fmease added a commit to fmease/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 10, 2024
jsondocck: Parse, don't validate commands.

Centralizes knowledge of jsondocck syntax into the parser, so the checker doesn't need to know what the indexes are.

[Vaguely related zulip discussion](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/266220-t-rustdoc/topic/jsondocck.20rewrite)

I'm very happy this is negative LoC, despite adding a big, documented enum!

r? `@fmease`
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 10, 2024
Rollup of 11 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#133478 (jsondocck: Parse, don't validate commands.)
 - rust-lang#133967 ([AIX] Pass -bnoipath when adding rust upstream dynamic crates)
 - rust-lang#133970 ([AIX] Replace sa_sigaction with sa_union.__su_sigaction for AIX)
 - rust-lang#133980 ([AIX] Remove option "-n" from AIX "ln" command)
 - rust-lang#134008 (Make `Copy` unsafe to implement for ADTs with `unsafe` fields)
 - rust-lang#134017 (Don't use `AsyncFnOnce::CallOnceFuture` bounds for signature deduction)
 - rust-lang#134023 (handle cygwin environment in `install::sanitize_sh`)
 - rust-lang#134041 (Use SourceMap to load debugger visualizer files)
 - rust-lang#134065 (Move `write_graphviz_results`)
 - rust-lang#134106 (Add compiler-maintainers who requested to be on review rotation)
 - rust-lang#134123 (bootstrap: Forward cargo JSON output to stdout, not stderr)

Failed merges:

 - rust-lang#134120 (Remove Felix from ping groups and review rotation)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 5416501 into rust-lang:master Dec 10, 2024
6 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.85.0 milestone Dec 10, 2024
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 10, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#133478 - aDotInTheVoid:finally, r=fmease

jsondocck: Parse, don't validate commands.

Centralizes knowledge of jsondocck syntax into the parser, so the checker doesn't need to know what the indexes are.

[Vaguely related zulip discussion](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/266220-t-rustdoc/topic/jsondocck.20rewrite)

I'm very happy this is negative LoC, despite adding a big, documented enum!

r? ``@fmease``
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-rustdoc-json Area: Rustdoc JSON backend S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc 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