There is likely to be new users with the alpha release, and there are a lot of documents on the internet (StackOverflow, reddit, blogs) that refer to these guides, so emitting a more helpful error than "404" is nice. Hence, I've temporarily reinstated stub documents for each of the old guides, referring to as relevant a part of the book as possible.
Also, rustbook was silently ignoring some errors, which lead to an inconsistency with directory creation/file writing. This meant the CSS file was not being written if no `doc` directory existed in the users build dir (e.g. the buildbots). This should mean that the CSS will appear automatically in later builds.
Here's my PR for the changes discussed in #19823. I decided to leave `_these_` types of italics the way there were because it differentiates the use of italics for emphasis from `*key term*` italics. Otherwise, bolded terms have been changed to italics, and single and double quotes have been changed appropriately, depending on their context (my judgement may not be the best, though).
r? @steveklabnik (congratulations on #19897 being finalized and merged, by the way!)
This will temporarily prevent warnings generated from expanding to code that the
test harness itself uses. This solution will require tweaking around the beta
cycle, but it will prevent spurious warnings for now.
Closes#20823
This will temporarily prevent warnings generated from expanding to code that the
test harness itself uses. This solution will require tweaking around the beta
cycle, but it will prevent spurious warnings for now.
Closes#20823
Currently we pass a `struct S(u64)` as an immediate value on i686, but a
`struct S { x: u64 }` is passed indirectly. This seems pretty wrong,
as they both have the same underlying LLVM type `{ i64 }`, no sense in
treating them differently.
Without this, rustbook was failing because it was expecting the
directory to exist. (Previously, rustbook was just silently failing to
install the CSS files due to this.)
There are hundreds of stackoverflow answers, reddit posts and blog
articles that link to these documents, so it's a nicer user experience
if they're not plain 404s.
The intention is to let these hang around only for relatively short
while. The alpha is likely to bring in many new users and they will be
reading the documents mentioned above.
Because we are warning about unstable APIs and there are many
of these yet, this creates a high likelyhood doc tests will
fail.
This doesn't seem right as a blanket policy to me anyway, though
certainly we want it in std. Probably more appropriate to add
a rustdoc option.
