Report errors instead of panic!() when linkcheck encounters absolute paths #47387
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
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @steveklabnik (or someone else) soon. If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
shepmaster
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
This will also make the linkchecker more useful as an all-around tool if we decide to pull it out into a crate. |
steveklabnik
approved these changes
Jan 15, 2018
|
Nice, thank you! @bors: r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit f7b4877 has been approved by |
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2018
…teveklabnik Report errors instead of panic!() when linkcheck encounters absolute paths The RBE contained some absolute links that failed the link check in rust-lang#46196. Diagnosing these issues was needlessly complicated, thanks to the linkchecker just panicing instead of reporting proper errors. This PR replaces the panic with a proper `*errors = true` + error message handling. The linkchecker itself doesn't have any tests so I intentionally didn't touch anything else than the code that previously did the `panic!()`. A small code quality improvement might be made by binding the `Path::new(base).join(url)` into a variable before the for-loop and using this resolved url in both the for loop and the error message. r? @steveklabnik (If not for any other reason than having r on the rust-lang#46196.)
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2018
…teveklabnik Report errors instead of panic!() when linkcheck encounters absolute paths The RBE contained some absolute links that failed the link check in rust-lang#46196. Diagnosing these issues was needlessly complicated, thanks to the linkchecker just panicing instead of reporting proper errors. This PR replaces the panic with a proper `*errors = true` + error message handling. The linkchecker itself doesn't have any tests so I intentionally didn't touch anything else than the code that previously did the `panic!()`. A small code quality improvement might be made by binding the `Path::new(base).join(url)` into a variable before the for-loop and using this resolved url in both the for loop and the error message. r? @steveklabnik (If not for any other reason than having r on the rust-lang#46196.)
kennytm
added a commit
to kennytm/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 17, 2018
…teveklabnik Report errors instead of panic!() when linkcheck encounters absolute paths The RBE contained some absolute links that failed the link check in rust-lang#46196. Diagnosing these issues was needlessly complicated, thanks to the linkchecker just panicing instead of reporting proper errors. This PR replaces the panic with a proper `*errors = true` + error message handling. The linkchecker itself doesn't have any tests so I intentionally didn't touch anything else than the code that previously did the `panic!()`. A small code quality improvement might be made by binding the `Path::new(base).join(url)` into a variable before the for-loop and using this resolved url in both the for loop and the error message. r? @steveklabnik (If not for any other reason than having r on the rust-lang#46196.)
kennytm
added a commit
to kennytm/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 17, 2018
…teveklabnik Report errors instead of panic!() when linkcheck encounters absolute paths The RBE contained some absolute links that failed the link check in rust-lang#46196. Diagnosing these issues was needlessly complicated, thanks to the linkchecker just panicing instead of reporting proper errors. This PR replaces the panic with a proper `*errors = true` + error message handling. The linkchecker itself doesn't have any tests so I intentionally didn't touch anything else than the code that previously did the `panic!()`. A small code quality improvement might be made by binding the `Path::new(base).join(url)` into a variable before the for-loop and using this resolved url in both the for loop and the error message. r? @steveklabnik (If not for any other reason than having r on the rust-lang#46196.)
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 17, 2018
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.
The RBE contained some absolute links that failed the link check in #46196. Diagnosing these issues was needlessly complicated, thanks to the linkchecker just panicing instead of reporting proper errors.
This PR replaces the panic with a proper
*errors = true+ error message handling.The linkchecker itself doesn't have any tests so I intentionally didn't touch anything else than the code that previously did the
panic!(). A small code quality improvement might be made by binding thePath::new(base).join(url)into a variable before the for-loop and using this resolved url in both the for loop and the error message.r? @steveklabnik
(If not for any other reason than having r on the #46196.)