[rustdoc] Do not emit redundant_explicit_links lint if the doc comment comes from expansion #141648
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
…t comes from expansion
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
…ing from expansion
GuillaumeGomez
force-pushed
the
redundant_explicit_links-expansion
branch
from
5e8b79b to
ec9530a
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy cc @rust-lang/clippy |
|
A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain) Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
| @@ -45,6 +45,9 @@ pub struct DocFragment { | |||
| pub doc: Symbol, | |||
| pub kind: DocFragmentKind, | |||
| pub indent: usize, | |||
| /// Because we temper with the spans context, this information cannot be correctly retrieved | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| /// Because we temper with the spans context, this information cannot be correctly retrieved | |
| /// Because we tamper with the spans context, this information cannot be correctly retrieved |
| @@ -497,16 +501,21 @@ fn collect_link_data<'input, F: BrokenLinkCallback<'input>>( | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| /// Returns a span encompassing all the document fragments. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| /// Returns a span encompassing all the document fragments. | |
| /// Returns a span encompassing all the document fragments. | |
| /// | |
| /// Also returns a boolean that is `true` if the fragments are from a macro expansion. |
Boolean return values can sometimes be unclear which state represents what,
so I think it's safest to always document it.
| let last_fragment = fragments.last().expect("no doc strings provided"); | ||
| Some(( | ||
| first_fragment.span.to(last_fragment.span), | ||
| first_fragment.from_expansion || last_fragment.from_expansion, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| first_fragment.from_expansion || last_fragment.from_expansion, | |
| fragments.iter().any(|frag| frag.from_expansion) |
In case only the middle fragment is from an expansion (we should also add a testcase for this).
| return None; | ||
| } | ||
| let end = fragments.last().expect("no doc strings provided").span; | ||
| Some(start.to(end)) | ||
| let last_fragment = fragments.last().expect("no doc strings provided"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note: this expect is now unreachable, since any list with a first element must also have a last element.
| @@ -531,7 +540,7 @@ pub fn source_span_for_markdown_range( | |||
| markdown: &str, | |||
| md_range: &Range<usize>, | |||
| fragments: &[DocFragment], | |||
| ) -> Option<Span> { | |||
| ) -> Option<(Span, bool)> { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should also document the meaning of the boolean return on this function too.
Comment on lines
+230
to
+239
| let (explicit_span, from_expansion) = source_span_for_markdown_range( | ||
| cx.tcx, | ||
| doc, | ||
| &offset_explicit_range(doc, link_range.clone(), b'[', b']'), | ||
| &item.attrs.doc_strings, | ||
| )?; | ||
| let display_span = source_span_for_markdown_range( | ||
| if from_expansion { | ||
| return None; | ||
| } | ||
| let (display_span, _) = source_span_for_markdown_range( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why are we checking from_expansion in one of these cases but not the other? We should probably be checking both, since the original source_span_for_markdown_range can fail, and it's possible both halves of the link are in different fragments, and only one the latter is macro generated.
alternatively, if we really cared about saving branches, we could probably get the display span by subtracting the explicit span from the total span, eliminating a call to source_span_for_markdown_range.
also, the use of ? here will cause false negatives if source_span_for_markdown_range fails, which is quite common since it uses quite course heuristics.
For example, this produces no warnings:
/// [bar](bar)
#[doc = ""]
pub fn foo() {}
pub fn bar() {}Technically this is an unrelated and preexisting bug, so I can spin this off into a separate issue and send a followup PR if you want, but it might be easier to just squash it now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch, gonna handle this case here.
Comment on lines
+20
to
+24
| #[doc = mac1!()] | ||
| pub struct Foo; | ||
|
|
||
| // Should not lint. | ||
| mac2!{} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be nice to also see some tests mixing macro generated fragments with non-generated fragments on the same item.
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.
Fixes #141553.
The problem was that we change the context for the attributes in some cases to get better error output, preventing us to detect if the attribute comes from expansion. Most of the changes are about keeping track of the "does this span comes from expansion" information.
r? @Manishearth