This commit series starts out with more official test harness support for rustdoc tests, and then each commit afterwards adds a test (where appropriate). Each commit should also test and finish independently of all others (they're all pretty separable).
I've uploaded a [copy of the documentation](http://people.mozilla.org/~acrichton/doc/std/) generated after all these commits were applied, and a double check on issues being closed would be greatly appreciated! I'll also browse the docs a bit and make sure nothing regressed too horribly.
Basically, the overall structure is this:
* Getting Started - getting an environment up and running
* Learn Rust - project-based learning the basics
* Effective Rust - higher level concepts that lead to writing good rust
* Syntax and Semantics - chunks of exactly what it sounds like
* Nightly Rust - unstable stuff, a staging area for documenting features
* Glossary - self-explanatory
There's a number of weaknesses with the current TOC, but I'll just focus on the strengths of the new one:
We start off with getting our environment set up. That's "getting started".
Then, we basically present you with two choices: do you want to start small, with bits of syntax? Or do you want to dive in with projects?
I'm guessing more people will choose the second, so that's the next part: "Learn Rust." I don't have any chapters here, but this would have an updated guessing game, a tutorial on building a little `wc` clone, and something else I haven't decided yet. Lots of options. But the idea is to just dive in and get your hands dirty. I'll heavily link to the 'syntax and semantics' sections that are relevant.
Then, a section I'm calling 'Effective Rust'. it feels greedy to steal that title, so I'm hoping to give it another name. These are higher-level things than syntax that Rust programmers should know: error handling is a great example. Most of these are sort of 'how do I use the standard library together' kinds of things. This also contains informations about systems programming that those new to it might not know: the stack vs the heap, for example.
Then, "Syntax and Semantics." This has one section for each bit of Rust. Small, focused, but explains _everything_. These are positioned to be almost entirely in-order, but heavily cross-link, so you can go out of order if you want to, but you can also use it as a reference.
Next, "Nightly Rust," where documenting unstable things goes. If we want to get good feedback on new features, they'll need to be documented, but we don't want to taint the main docs, so that's what this is for.
Finally, the glossary. Straightforward enough.
--------------------------------
This is going to be a terrible PR to review, so I just did the TOC re-organization, with basically no editing. So it'll be a bit jumbled at first. But next steps are to go through and edit / revise / tweak / add stuff to get it in tip-top shape for 1.0!
Right now rustdoc replaces the string ".md)" with ".html)" to fix links between
markdown files, so use a different syntax that doesn't get caught in the
crossfire.
Closes#22900
traits.md said:
If we add a `use` line right above `main` and make the right things public,
everything is fine:
However, the use line was actually placed at the top of the file instead. Move
the use line to right above main. That also makes the example more evocative
of cases where the module is defined in a separate file.
Fixes#24030
Of the four code samples with modules in TRPL:
- 2 use `mod test`
- 2 use `mod tests`
We should be consistent here, but which is right? The stdlib is split:
$ grep -r 'mod tests {' src/lib* | wc -l
63
$ grep -r 'mod test {' src/lib* | wc -l
58
Subjectively, I like the plural, but both the language reference and the
style guide recommend the singular. So we'll go with that here, for now.
r? @steveklabnik
traits.md said:
If we add a `use` line right above `main` and make the right things public,
everything is fine:
However, the use line was actually placed at the top of the file instead. Move
the use line to right above main. That also makes the example more evocative
of cases where the module is defined in a separate file.
I ran across a comma splice.
I didn't set the "note:" off inside parenthesis. I looked around in other places and saw it both ways, but without surrounding parenthesis seemed to be the more common convention followed elsewhere in the docs. Let me know if you have an overriding preference about that and I'll change it.
r? @steveklabnik
This syncs the _Crates and Modules_ chapter of the book with current output:
* the runs are supposed to be in the project’s directory,
* `rustc` has slightly different error messages (and things like macro line:col numbers),
* Cargo now compiles things into `target/debug`.
Fixes#24030
Of the four code samples with modules in TRPL:
- 2 use `mod test`
- 2 use `mod tests`
We should be consistent here, but which is right? The stdlib is split:
$ grep -r 'mod tests {' src/lib* | wc -l
63
$ grep -r 'mod test {' src/lib* | wc -l
58
Subjectively, I like the plural, but both the language reference and the
style guide recommend the singular. So we'll go with that here, for now.
This is the first use of `box`. It's an unstable feature and also isn't
consistent with the use of `Box` in the "original" code above it.
r? @steveklabnik
This is a deprecated attribute that is slated for removal, and it also affects
all implementors of the trait. This commit removes the attribute and fixes up
implementors accordingly. The primary implementation which was lost was the
ability to compare `&[T]` and `Vec<T>` (in that order).
This change also modifies the `assert_eq!` macro to not consider both directions
of equality, only the one given in the left/right forms to the macro. This
modification is motivated due to the fact that `&[T] == Vec<T>` no longer
compiles, causing hundreds of errors in unit tests in the standard library (and
likely throughout the community as well).
Closes#19470
[breaking-change]
