Skip to content
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.

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

Pull rustdoc_ng into mainline. #8540

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Sep 16, 2013
Merged

Pull rustdoc_ng into mainline. #8540

merged 5 commits into from
Sep 16, 2013

Conversation

emberian
Copy link
Member

This doesn't enable it by default yet, or include the frontend. But the tool
is pretty much done, and it'd be nice to stave off bitrot.

I couldn't get it to actually build with the Makefile though. I don't really
understand what is going on in that makefile at all. Could @graydon or
@pnkfelix lend a hand?

@emberian
Copy link
Member Author

Also, it'd be cool to build it with rustpkg (because it can be), but I don't know how that would work with staging or anything else.

@graydon
Copy link
Contributor

graydon commented Aug 19, 2013

Try to grab me during the week, I'll see what I can do.

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

(My usual first piece of advice applies here: Install GNU remake and use its --trace option to get better feedback about what make is doing when it processes a clever makefile like this.)

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

@cmr I'm guessing you probably made your changes to mk/tools.mk based on duplicating what you saw already in place for the old rustdoc. In addition to grepping through mk/*.mk, you also need to look at Makefile.in, which is what configure uses as a template from which to generate the Makefile it puts into the object-file build tree.

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

@cmr Ah, looking at the situation more carefully now, I realized that your outermost structure for rustdoc_ng does not match what the other rust tools are doing; in particular, most (every?) other tool builds a library as its primary crate type, and those all link into the main rust driver library. Your rustdoc_ng's main.rs has no library target; it is going straight to a binary.

We can probably integrate what you have as it stands, but I'm not sure if that's a great idea; there's value in the existing pattern, and it might behoove you to switch to it.

@emberian
Copy link
Member Author

@pnkfelix does that look better?

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

@cmr yes I think so. I'll see if I can finish incorporating it into the makefile infrastructure, so that we at least test that it builds.

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

pnkfelix commented Sep 1, 2013

@cmr this commit will finish the job: pnkfelix/rust@7a6a912

(At least an invocation of make seems to do a full build that includes librustdoc_ng library, but not the rustdoc_ng binary.)

I tried to open a Pull Request directly over to your own repo, but cmr/rust did not appear in the github interface for the base fork. But you should be able to pull the commit over yourself and add it to this pull request. (Though you probably should rebase it first, since I am pretty sure I've made some changes to the Makefiles that you'll want to merge in.)

@emberian
Copy link
Member Author

emberian commented Sep 5, 2013

@pcwalton each_path was removed; I use/used it with https://github.com/cmr/rust/blob/27de8b5467a6f2a10294737cb15e2d233c6aa305/src/rustdoc_ng/clean.rs#L993, what should that be updated to use?

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

pnkfelix commented Sep 9, 2013

@cmr I infer from SHA: 1bbb1e0 (where each_path was actually removed) that you should replace uses of each_path with some combination of each_top_level_item_of_crate and/or each_child_of_item, no?

@catamorphism
Copy link
Contributor

@cmr make tidy please :-)

@klutzy
Copy link
Contributor

klutzy commented Sep 14, 2013

See #9055 for the win32 failure

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 16, 2013
This doesn't enable it by default yet, or include the frontend. But the tool
is pretty much done, and it'd be nice to stave off bitrot.

I couldn't get it to actually build with the Makefile though. I don't really
understand what is going on in that makefile at all. Could @graydon or
@pnkfelix lend a hand?
@bors bors closed this Sep 16, 2013
@bors bors merged commit 0298c3c into rust-lang:master Sep 16, 2013
@jyn514 jyn514 mentioned this pull request Mar 1, 2021
JohnTitor added a commit to JohnTitor/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2021
…eGomez

Cleanup rustdoc warnings

## Clean up error reporting for deprecated passes

Using `error!` here goes all the way back to the original commit, rust-lang#8540. I don't see any reason to use logging; rustdoc should use diagnostics wherever possible. See rust-lang#81932 (comment) for further context.

- Use spans for deprecated attributes
- Use a proper diagnostic for unknown passes, instead of error logging
- Add tests for unknown passes
- Improve some wording in diagnostics

##  Report that `doc(plugins)` doesn't work using diagnostics instead of `eprintln!`

This also adds a test for the output.

This was added in rust-lang#52194. I don't see any particular reason not to use diagnostics here, I think it was just missed in rust-lang#50541.
JohnTitor added a commit to JohnTitor/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2021
…eGomez

Cleanup rustdoc warnings

## Clean up error reporting for deprecated passes

Using `error!` here goes all the way back to the original commit, rust-lang#8540. I don't see any reason to use logging; rustdoc should use diagnostics wherever possible. See rust-lang#81932 (comment) for further context.

- Use spans for deprecated attributes
- Use a proper diagnostic for unknown passes, instead of error logging
- Add tests for unknown passes
- Improve some wording in diagnostics

##  Report that `doc(plugins)` doesn't work using diagnostics instead of `eprintln!`

This also adds a test for the output.

This was added in rust-lang#52194. I don't see any particular reason not to use diagnostics here, I think it was just missed in rust-lang#50541.
m-ou-se added a commit to m-ou-se/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2021
…eGomez

Cleanup rustdoc warnings

## Clean up error reporting for deprecated passes

Using `error!` here goes all the way back to the original commit, rust-lang#8540. I don't see any reason to use logging; rustdoc should use diagnostics wherever possible. See rust-lang#81932 (comment) for further context.

- Use spans for deprecated attributes
- Use a proper diagnostic for unknown passes, instead of error logging
- Add tests for unknown passes
- Improve some wording in diagnostics

##  Report that `doc(plugins)` doesn't work using diagnostics instead of `eprintln!`

This also adds a test for the output.

This was added in rust-lang#52194. I don't see any particular reason not to use diagnostics here, I think it was just missed in rust-lang#50541.
Dylan-DPC-zz pushed a commit to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2021
…eGomez

Cleanup rustdoc warnings

## Clean up error reporting for deprecated passes

Using `error!` here goes all the way back to the original commit, rust-lang#8540. I don't see any reason to use logging; rustdoc should use diagnostics wherever possible. See rust-lang#81932 (comment) for further context.

- Use spans for deprecated attributes
- Use a proper diagnostic for unknown passes, instead of error logging
- Add tests for unknown passes
- Improve some wording in diagnostics

##  Report that `doc(plugins)` doesn't work using diagnostics instead of `eprintln!`

This also adds a test for the output.

This was added in rust-lang#52194. I don't see any particular reason not to use diagnostics here, I think it was just missed in rust-lang#50541.
JohnTitor added a commit to JohnTitor/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 7, 2021
…eGomez

Cleanup rustdoc warnings

## Clean up error reporting for deprecated passes

Using `error!` here goes all the way back to the original commit, rust-lang#8540. I don't see any reason to use logging; rustdoc should use diagnostics wherever possible. See rust-lang#81932 (comment) for further context.

- Use spans for deprecated attributes
- Use a proper diagnostic for unknown passes, instead of error logging
- Add tests for unknown passes
- Improve some wording in diagnostics

##  Report that `doc(plugins)` doesn't work using diagnostics instead of `eprintln!`

This also adds a test for the output.

This was added in rust-lang#52194. I don't see any particular reason not to use diagnostics here, I think it was just missed in rust-lang#50541.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants