resolve: Reduce scope of `pub_use_of_private_extern_crate` deprecation lint
This lint was deny-by-default since July 2017, crater showed 7 uses on crates.io back then (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/42894#issuecomment-311921147).
Unfortunately, the construction `pub use foo as bar` where `foo` is `extern crate foo;` was used by an older version `bitflags`, so turning it into an error causes too many regressions.
So, this PR reduces the scope of the lint instead of turning it into a hard error, and only turns some more rarely used components of it into errors.
- Rename `broken_intra_doc_links` to `rustdoc::broken_intra_doc_links`
- Ensure that the old lint names still work and give deprecation errors
- Register lints even when running doctests
Otherwise, all `rustdoc::` lints would be ignored.
- Register all existing lints as removed
This unfortunately doesn't work with `register_renamed` because tool
lints have not yet been registered when rustc is running. For similar
reasons, `check_backwards_compat` doesn't work either. Call
`register_removed` directly instead.
- Fix fallout
+ Rustdoc lints for compiler/
+ Rustdoc lints for library/
Note that this does *not* suggest `rustdoc::broken_intra_doc_links` for
`rustdoc::intra_doc_link_resolution_failure`, since there was no time
when the latter was valid.
Add test to prevent src link regression
Fixes#80502.
This PR is simply about adding a test to prevent a regression.
cc `@bugadani` `@CraftSpider`
r? `@camelid`
Unfortunately, this can't currently be tested. The problem is that we
need the file to be compiled first to then be used as dependency, which
cannot be done currently unfortunately in the rustdoc test suites.
Example:
```rust
// name this file "foo.rs"
/// ```
/// let x = foo::foo();
/// ```
pub fn foo() {}
```
If you run `rustdoc --test foo.rs`, you'll get:
```
running 1 test
test foo.rs - foo (line 1) ... FAILED
failures:
---- foo.rs - foo (line 1) stdout ----
error[E0463]: can't find crate for `foo`
--> foo.rs:0:1
|
2 | extern crate foo;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ can't find crate
```
If a test were possible, it would look something like
````rust
#![crate_name = "mod"]
#![crate_type = "lib"]
//! ```
//! // NOTE: requires that the literal string 'mod' appears in the doctest for
//! // the bug to appear
//! assert_eq!(1, 1);
//! ```
````
The angle brackets were not rendered, so code like this:
some_func: for<'a> fn(val: &'a i32) -> i32
would be rendered as:
some_func: fn'a(val: &'a i32) -> i32
However, rendering with angle brackets is still invalid syntax:
some_func: fn<'a>(val: &'a i32) -> i32
so now it renders correctly as:
some_func: for<'a> fn(val: &'a i32) -> i32
-----
However, note that this code:
some_trait: dyn for<'a> Trait<'a>
will still render as:
some_trait: dyn Trait<'a>
which is not invalid syntax, but is still unclear. Unfortunately I think
it's hard to fix that case because there isn't enough information in the
`rustdoc::clean::Type` that this code operates on. Perhaps that case can
be fixed in a later PR.
Fix rendering of stabilization version for trait implementors
Rustdoc compares an item's stabilization version with its parent's to not render it if they are the same. Here, the implementor was compared with itself, resulting in the stabilization version never getting shown.
This probably needs a test.
Fixes#80777.
r? `@jyn514`
Deprecate-in-future the constants superceded by RFC 2700
Successor to #78335, re-opened after addressing the issues tracked in #68490.
This PR makes use of the new ability to explicitly annotate an item as triggering the deprecated-in-future lint (via `rustc_deprecated(since="TBD"`, see #78381). We might call this *soft deprecation*; unlike with deprecation, users will *not* receive warnings when compiling code that uses these items *unless* they opt-in via `#[warn(deprecated_in_future)]`. Like deprecation, soft deprecation causes documentation to formally acknowledge that an item is marked for eventual deprecation (at a non-specific point in the future).
With this new ability, we can sidestep all debate about when or on what timeframe something ought to be deprecated; as long as we can agree that something ought to be deprecated, we can receive much of the benefits of deprecation with none of the drawbacks. For these items specifically, the libs team has already agreed that they should be deprecated (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/68490#issuecomment-747022696).
Don't try to add nested predicate to Rustdoc auto-trait `ParamEnv`
Fixes#80233
We already have logic in `evaluate_predicates` that tries to add
unimplemented predicates to our `ParamEnv`. Trying to add a predicate
that already holds can lead to errors later on, since projection
will prefer trait candidates from the `ParamEnv` to predicates from an
impl.
rustdoc: Resolve `&str` as `str`
People almost always are referring to `&str`, not `str`, so this will
save a manual link resolve in many cases.
Note that we already accept `&` (resolves to `reference`) in intra-doc
links, so this shouldn't cause breakage.
r? `@jyn514`
rustdoc: Remove `*` intra-doc alias for `pointer`
It's not valid Rust code and it can easily be confused with a wildcard
glob pattern or something else. People can always use `pointer` instead,
so it's just removing an alias.
It hasn't hit stable yet (I think it's still on nightly), so it's okay
to remove it. (We can always add it back later if we change our mind
too.)
r? `@jyn514`
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80885#discussion_r554622737
