rustdoc: Use diagnostics for error when including sources #82993
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
camelid
added
A-diagnostics
|
r? @jyn514 (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
camelid
force-pushed
the
source-use-diag
branch
from
afe14b0
to
0260395
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
This will likely conflict with #82994 so probably one of these should be merged before the other. |
camelid
force-pushed
the
source-use-diag
branch
from
0260395
to
e17f56f
Compare
camelid
commented
Mar 10, 2021
jyn514
reviewed
Mar 22, 2021
camelid
added
the
S-waiting-on-author
camelid
force-pushed
the
source-use-diag
branch
from
655a62c
to
4d5e10e
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Time for a rebase! |
camelid
force-pushed
the
source-use-diag
branch
from
4d5e10e
to
db84c4a
Compare
jyn514
removed
the
S-waiting-on-review
camelid
force-pushed
the
source-use-diag
branch
from
db84c4a
to
5b08999
Compare
camelid
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Okay, should be ready for review now! |
This error probably almost never happens, but we should still use the
diagnostic infrastructure. My guess is that the error was added back
before rustdoc used the rustc diagnostic infrastructure (it was all
`println!` and `eprintln!` back then!) and since it likely rarely occurs
and this code doesn't change that much, no one thought to transition it
to using diagnostics.
Note that the old error was actually a warning (it didn't stop the rest
of doc building). It seems very unlikely that this would fail without
the rest of the doc build failing, so it makes more sense for it to be a
hard error.
The error looks like this:
error: failed to render source code for `src/test/rustdoc/smart-punct.rs`: "bar": foo
--> src/test/rustdoc/smart-punct.rs:3:1
|
3 | / #![crate_name = "foo"]
4 | |
5 | | //! This is the "start" of the 'document'! How'd you know that "it's" ...
6 | | //!
... |
22 | | //! I say "don't smart-punct me -- please!"
23 | | //! ```
| |_______^
I wasn't sure how to trigger the error, so to create that message I
temporarily made rustdoc always emit it. That's also why it says "bar"
and "foo" instead of a real error message.
Note that the span of the diagnostic starts at line 3 because line 1 of
that file is a (non-doc) comment and line 2 is a blank line.
|
Squashed. |
camelid
force-pushed
the
source-use-diag
branch
from
5b08999
to
3d8ce0a
Compare
camelid
changed the title
|
r=me with CI passing |
|
@bors r=jyn514 |
|
📌 Commit 3d8ce0a has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Dylan-DPC-zz
pushed a commit
to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 26, 2021
rustdoc: Use diagnostics for error when including sources
This error probably almost never happens, but we should still use the
diagnostic infrastructure. My guess is that the error was added back
before rustdoc used the rustc diagnostic infrastructure (it was all
`println!` and `eprintln!` back then!) and since it likely rarely occurs
and this code doesn't change that much, no one thought to transition it
to using diagnostics.
Note that the old error was actually a warning (it didn't stop the rest
of doc building). It seems very unlikely that this would fail without
the rest of the doc build failing, so it makes more sense for it to be a
hard error.
The error looks like this:
error: failed to render source code for `src/test/rustdoc/smart-punct.rs`: "bar": foo
--> src/test/rustdoc/smart-punct.rs:3:1
|
3 | / #![crate_name = "foo"]
4 | |
5 | | //! This is the "start" of the 'document'! How'd you know that "it's" ...
6 | | //!
... |
22 | | //! I say "don't smart-punct me -- please!"
23 | | //! ```
| |_______^
I wasn't sure how to trigger the error, so to create that message I
temporarily made rustdoc always emit it. That's also why it says "bar"
and "foo" instead of a real error message.
Note that the span of the diagnostic starts at line 3 because line 1 of
that file is a (non-doc) comment and line 2 is a blank line.
Dylan-DPC-zz
pushed a commit
to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 27, 2021
rustdoc: Use diagnostics for error when including sources
This error probably almost never happens, but we should still use the
diagnostic infrastructure. My guess is that the error was added back
before rustdoc used the rustc diagnostic infrastructure (it was all
`println!` and `eprintln!` back then!) and since it likely rarely occurs
and this code doesn't change that much, no one thought to transition it
to using diagnostics.
Note that the old error was actually a warning (it didn't stop the rest
of doc building). It seems very unlikely that this would fail without
the rest of the doc build failing, so it makes more sense for it to be a
hard error.
The error looks like this:
error: failed to render source code for `src/test/rustdoc/smart-punct.rs`: "bar": foo
--> src/test/rustdoc/smart-punct.rs:3:1
|
3 | / #![crate_name = "foo"]
4 | |
5 | | //! This is the "start" of the 'document'! How'd you know that "it's" ...
6 | | //!
... |
22 | | //! I say "don't smart-punct me -- please!"
23 | | //! ```
| |_______^
I wasn't sure how to trigger the error, so to create that message I
temporarily made rustdoc always emit it. That's also why it says "bar"
and "foo" instead of a real error message.
Note that the span of the diagnostic starts at line 3 because line 1 of
that file is a (non-doc) comment and line 2 is a blank line.
Dylan-DPC-zz
pushed a commit
to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 27, 2021
rustdoc: Use diagnostics for error when including sources
This error probably almost never happens, but we should still use the
diagnostic infrastructure. My guess is that the error was added back
before rustdoc used the rustc diagnostic infrastructure (it was all
`println!` and `eprintln!` back then!) and since it likely rarely occurs
and this code doesn't change that much, no one thought to transition it
to using diagnostics.
Note that the old error was actually a warning (it didn't stop the rest
of doc building). It seems very unlikely that this would fail without
the rest of the doc build failing, so it makes more sense for it to be a
hard error.
The error looks like this:
error: failed to render source code for `src/test/rustdoc/smart-punct.rs`: "bar": foo
--> src/test/rustdoc/smart-punct.rs:3:1
|
3 | / #![crate_name = "foo"]
4 | |
5 | | //! This is the "start" of the 'document'! How'd you know that "it's" ...
6 | | //!
... |
22 | | //! I say "don't smart-punct me -- please!"
23 | | //! ```
| |_______^
I wasn't sure how to trigger the error, so to create that message I
temporarily made rustdoc always emit it. That's also why it says "bar"
and "foo" instead of a real error message.
Note that the span of the diagnostic starts at line 3 because line 1 of
that file is a (non-doc) comment and line 2 is a blank line.
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 27, 2021
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#81351 (combine: stop eagerly evaluating consts) - rust-lang#82525 (make unaligned_references future-incompat lint warn-by-default) - rust-lang#82626 (update array missing `IntoIterator` msg) - rust-lang#82917 (Add function core::iter::zip) - rust-lang#82993 (rustdoc: Use diagnostics for error when including sources) - rust-lang#83522 (Improve fs error open_from unix) - rust-lang#83548 (Always preserve `None`-delimited groups in a captured `TokenStream`) - rust-lang#83555 (Add #[inline] to io::Error methods) Failed merges: - rust-lang#83130 (escape_ascii take 2) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This error probably almost never happens, but we should still use the
diagnostic infrastructure. My guess is that the error was added back
before rustdoc used the rustc diagnostic infrastructure (it was all
println!andeprintln!back then!) and since it likely rarely occursand this code doesn't change that much, no one thought to transition it
to using diagnostics.
Note that the old error was actually a warning (it didn't stop the rest
of doc building). It seems very unlikely that this would fail without
the rest of the doc build failing, so it makes more sense for it to be a
hard error.
The error looks like this:
I wasn't sure how to trigger the error, so to create that message I
temporarily made rustdoc always emit it. That's also why it says "bar"
and "foo" instead of a real error message.
Note that the span of the diagnostic starts at line 3 because line 1 of
that file is a (non-doc) comment and line 2 is a blank line.