Cosmetic improvements to doc comments
This has been factored out from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/58036 to only include changes to documentation comments (throughout the rustc codebase).
r? @steveklabnik
Once you're happy with this, maybe we could get it through with r=1, so it doesn't constantly get invalidated? (I'm not sure this will be an issue, but just in case...) Anyway, thanks for your advice so far!
Require a list of features in `#[allow_internal_unstable]`
The blanket-permission slip is not great and will likely give us trouble some point down the road.
Implement basic input validation for built-in attributes
Correct top-level shape (`#[attr]` vs `#[attr(...)]` vs `#[attr = ...]`) is enforced for built-in attributes, built-in attributes must also fit into the "meta-item" syntax (aka the "classic attribute syntax").
For some subset of attributes (found by crater run), errors are lowered to deprecation warnings.
NOTE: This PR previously included https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/57367 as well.
check stability of macro invocations
I haven't implemented tests yet but this should be a pretty solid prototype. I think as-implemented it will also stability-check macro invocations in the same crate, dunno if we want that or not.
I don't know if we want this to go through `rustc::middle::stability` or not, considering the information there wouldn't be available at the time of macro expansion (even for external crates, right?).
r? @nrc
closes#34079
cc @petrochenkov @durka @jseyfried #38356
Make sure crates not opting in to staged_api don't use staged_api
This also fixes the problem that with `-Zforce-unstable-if-unmarked` set, crates could not use `#[deprecated]`.
If you prefer, I can instead submit another version which just fixes this problem, but still allows the staged API attributes for all crates when `-Zforce-unstable-if-unmarked` is set. I have prepared that at <https://github.com/RalfJung/rust/tree/staged2>. As yet another alternative, @alexcrichton suggested to turn this error into a lint, but that seems to be much more work, so is it worth it?
Cc @alexcrichton #43975
Replaced by adding extra imports, adding hidden code (`# ...`), modifying
examples to be runnable (sorry Homura), specifying non-Rust code, and
converting to should_panic, no_run, or compile_fail.
Remaining "```ignore"s received an explanation why they are being ignored.
