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.
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]
This commit cleans out a large amount of deprecated APIs from the standard
library and some of the facade crates as well, updating all users in the
compiler and in tests as it goes along.
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).
cc #19470
[breaking-change]
The documentation says that 'The current convention is to use the `test` module
to hold your "unit-style"' but then defines the module as "tests" instead.
Also in the output of the command we can see:
```
test test::it_works ... ok
```
So I think the name of the module was meant to be "test"
