Skip to content

[rustdoc] Move doc cfg propagation pass before items stripping passes #147153

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 30, 2025
Merged

[rustdoc] Move doc cfg propagation pass before items stripping passes #147153

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 30, 2025
+20 −4

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Follow-up of #138907.

r? lolbinarycat

@rustbot rustbot added 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. T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output. labels Sep 29, 2025
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez changed the title Doc propagation before stripping items [rustdoc] Move doc cfg propagation pass before items stripping passes Sep 29, 2025
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the doc-propagation-before-stripping-items branch from 9157004 to a5068f7 Compare September 29, 2025 15:05
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the doc-propagation-before-stripping-items branch from a5068f7 to 9119eba Compare September 29, 2025 16:08
@lolbinarycat
Copy link
Contributor

This just made me realize that the way we print feature dependency info is often pretty bad. I originally read "Available on non-crate feature blob only" as referring to a "non-crate feature" (whatever that would mean) named "blob".

Anyways, that's an unrelated (and non-trivial) issue that should be addressed in a separate PR.

@bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 29, 2025

📌 Commit 9119eba has been approved by lolbinarycat

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 Sep 29, 2025
@jhpratt jhpratt mentioned this pull request Sep 30, 2025
Merged
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 30, 2025
@bors
Auto merge of #147169 - jhpratt:rollup-65ooei8, r=jhpratt
c5dc558 
Rollup of 4 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - #145883 (Make macOS dist build configuration match where reasonable)
 - #146457 (Skip cleanups on unsupported targets)
 - #147152 (builtin `Fn`-trait impls: instantiate binder before the return type `Sized` check)
 - #147153 ([rustdoc] Move doc cfg propagation pass before items stripping passes)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 745b8f6 into rust-lang:master Sep 30, 2025
10 checks passed
rust-timer added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 30, 2025
@rust-timer
Unrolled build for #147153
5c6fc68 
Rollup merge of #147153 - GuillaumeGomez:doc-propagation-before-stripping-items, r=lolbinarycat

[rustdoc] Move doc cfg propagation pass before items stripping passes

Follow-up of #138907.

r? lolbinarycat
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.92.0 milestone Sep 30, 2025
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez deleted the doc-propagation-before-stripping-items branch September 30, 2025 08:35
@ojeda
Copy link
Contributor

ojeda commented Oct 13, 2025 •
edited
Loading

I think this one implies that now intra-doc links are now checked in doc(hidden) items, right?

That is nice, since intra-doc links could be useful even if not rendered (e.g. for source view, IDEs, etc., plus to detect typos or if the docs get copied to public items, etc.), but I wanted to confirm whether that is expected behavior (because I need to clean up a couple cases in the kernel), and if so, whether we should add a test here on rustdoc about this.

Thanks!

fmease
fmease reviewed Oct 13, 2025
View reviewed changes
src/librustdoc/passes/mod.rs
ConditionalPass::new(STRIP_HIDDEN, WhenNotDocumentHidden),
ConditionalPass::new(STRIP_PRIVATE, WhenNotDocumentPrivate),
ConditionalPass::new(STRIP_PRIV_IMPORTS, WhenDocumentPrivate),
ConditionalPass::always(COLLECT_INTRA_DOC_LINKS),
Copy link
Member

@fmease fmease Oct 13, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Revisiting thus due to ojeda's comment. Moving the intra-doc link pass before the strippers seems very much like a mistake.

I believe this PR was a response to my review comment #138907 (comment) in which I requested to move the doc cfg propagation pass before the strippers.

I haven't tried it out yet but that review comment wasn't properly addressed then.

(You did also change the ordering in PASSES but that's only used in diagnostics IIRC)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Did the added test also work before this PR?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@fmease fmease fmease left review comments

Assignees

@lolbinarycat lolbinarycat

Labels

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. T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

1.92.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants

@GuillaumeGomez @rust-log-analyzer @lolbinarycat @bors @ojeda @fmease @rustbot