Add warning for invalid start of code blocks in rustdoc
Follow up of #48382.
Still two things to consider:
1. Adding test for rustdoc output (but where? In UI or in rustdoc tests?).
2. Try to fix the span issue.
r? @QuietMisdreavus
Remember state of top-level collapse toggle widget
This change allows the big top-right expand/collapse toggle to remember its setting across navigation or page reloads. Prior to this change, there was this annoyance:
- browse to some docs
- Click the minus button to collapse them
- browse to other docs (or reload the page)
- Everything is expanded again
The solution is based on storing a simple boolean flag in localStorage. I think it's a good improvement, but it does introduce the following potentially surprising behavior:
- browse to some docs
- click the minus button to collapse them
- click to expand a particular item (not the main top-right big one)
- reload the page, everything is collapsed
Paired with @debugsteven on this.
rustdoc: Foldable impl blocks
Addresses #40363, #45720, #24483, #23986 and so on
* Expands and refactors collapseDocs and toggleAllDocs
* Adds [-] toggle to all impls (including inherent impl)
* Makes it hiding though main css file, not though element inline style
May need to be addressed:
* "[-]" and anchor link copier are overlaid a bit
* Inherent methods are also hidden by the global [-] toggle.
* Auto-collapsing "Iterator" and so on by default is not implemented yet
* Tested only shallowly and only in Chromiuim
* No tests. Are there tests for css/js part here?
* The new implementation may be a bit slower.
What next steps are need to be done before the integration?
A new section is added to both both struct and trait doc pages.
On struct/enum pages, a new 'Auto Trait Implementations' section displays any
synthetic implementations for auto traits. Currently, this is only done
for Send and Sync.
On trait pages, a new 'Auto Implementors' section displays all types
which automatically implement the trait. Effectively, this is a list of
all public types in the standard library.
Synthesized impls for a particular auto trait ('synthetic impls') take
into account generic bounds. For example, a type 'struct Foo<T>(T)' will
have 'impl<T> Send for Foo<T> where T: Send' generated for it.
Manual implementations of auto traits are also taken into account. If we have
the following types:
'struct Foo<T>(T)'
'struct Wrapper<T>(Foo<T>)'
'unsafe impl<T> Send for Wrapper<T>' // pretend that Wrapper<T> makes
this sound somehow
Then Wrapper will have the following impl generated:
'impl<T> Send for Wrapper<T>'
reflecting the fact that 'T: Send' need not hold for 'Wrapper<T>: Send'
to hold
Lifetimes, HRTBS, and projections (e.g. '<T as Iterator>::Item') are
taken into account by synthetic impls
However, if a type can *never* implement a particular auto trait
(e.g. 'struct MyStruct<T>(*const T)'), then a negative impl will be
generated (in this case, 'impl<T> !Send for MyStruct<T>')
All of this means that a user should be able to copy-paste a synthetic
impl into their code, without any observable changes in behavior
(assuming the rest of the program remains unchanged).
Is it really time? Have our months, no, *years* of suffering come to an end? Are we finally able to cast off the pall of Hoedown? The weight which has dragged us down for so long?
-----
So, timeline for those who need to catch up:
* Way back in December 2016, [we decided we wanted to switch out the markdown renderer](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/38400). However, this was put on hold because the build system at the time made it difficult to pull in dependencies from crates.io.
* A few months later, in March 2017, [the first PR was done, to switch out the renderers entirely](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/40338). The PR itself was fraught with CI and build system issues, but eventually landed.
* However, not all was well in the Rustdoc world. During the PR and shortly after, we noticed [some differences in the way the two parsers handled some things](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/40912), and some of these differences were major enough to break the docs for some crates.
* A couple weeks afterward, [Hoedown was put back in](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/41290), at this point just to catch tests that Pulldown was "spuriously" running. This would at least provide some warning about spurious tests, rather than just breaking spontaneously.
* However, the problems had created enough noise by this point that just a few days after that, [Hoedown was switched back to the default](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/41431) while we came up with a solution for properly warning about the differences.
* That solution came a few weeks later, [as a series of warnings when the HTML emitted by the two parsers was semantically different](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/41991). But that came at a cost, as now rustdoc needed proc-macro support (the new crate needed some custom derives farther down its dependency tree), and the build system was not equipped to handle it at the time. It was worked on for three months as the issue stumped more and more people.
* In that time, [bootstrap was completely reworked](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/43059) to change how it ordered compilation, and [the method by which it built rustdoc would change](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/43482), as well. This allowed it to only be built after stage1, when proc-macros would be available, allowing the "rendering differences" PR to finally land.
* The warnings were not perfect, and revealed a few [spurious](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/44368) [differences](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/45421) between how we handled the renderers.
* Once these were handled, [we flipped the switch to turn on the "rendering difference" warnings all the time](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/45324), in October 2017. This began the "warning cycle" for this change, and landed in stable in 1.23, on 2018-01-04.
* Once those warnings hit stable, and after a couple weeks of seeing whether we would get any more reports than what we got from sitting on nightly/beta, [we switched the renderers](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/47398), making Pulldown the default but still offering the option to use Hoedown.
And that brings us to the present. We haven't received more new issues from this in the meantime, and the "switch by default" is now on beta. Our reasoning is that, at this point, anyone who would have been affected by this has run into it already.
Changed color of struct link from #ff794d to #2dbfb8 for Rust docs
This is in reference to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/47801
here I have changed the default color of struct link for `#ff794d` to `#2dbfb8`
cc: @nagisa @timClicks
