Skip to content

[rustdoc] Correctly handle should_panic doctest attribute and fix --no-run test flag on the 2024 edition #147674

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 11 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[rustdoc] Correctly handle should_panic doctest attribute and fix --no-run test flag on the 2024 edition #147674

wants to merge 11 commits into from

Conversation

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez commented Oct 14, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Fixes #143009.
Fixes #143858.

Supersedes #143900.

For --no-run, we forgot to check the "global" options in the 2024 edition, fixed in the first commit.

For should_panic fix, the exit code check has been fixed.

r? @fmease

@rustbot rustbot added A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Oct 14, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 14, 2025

fmease is currently at their maximum review capacity.
They may take a while to respond.

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

GuillaumeGomez commented Oct 14, 2025

Let's see if it works like that, otherwise I'll add some cfg(bootstrap) around. Locally with stage 2 it worked fine.

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez mentioned this pull request Oct 14, 2025
Closed
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

GuillaumeGomez commented Oct 14, 2025

Ah right, forgot to fix std doc examples.

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

GuillaumeGomez commented Oct 15, 2025

Checking all previously failing CIs.

@bors try jobs=armhf-gnu,test-various,x86_64-gnu-aux

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 15, 2025
@rust-bors
Auto merge of #147674 - GuillaumeGomez:fix-compile_fail, r=<try>
0c093af 
[rustdoc] Correctly handle `should_panic` doctest attribute and fix `--no-run` test flag on the 2024 edition

try-job: armhf-gnu
try-job: test-various
try-job: x86_64-gnu-aux
@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Oct 15, 2025

💔 Test for 0c093af failed: CI. Failed jobs:

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

GuillaumeGomez commented Oct 16, 2025

So the error comes from the fact that should_panic is ignored on some platforms by libtest and rustdoc didn't do this check. I added it as well.

Let's try again.

@bors try jobs=armhf-gnu,test-various,x86_64-gnu-aux

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 16, 2025
@rust-bors
Auto merge of #147674 - GuillaumeGomez:fix-compile_fail, r=<try>
7103c01 
[rustdoc] Correctly handle `should_panic` doctest attribute and fix `--no-run` test flag on the 2024 edition

try-job: armhf-gnu
try-job: test-various
try-job: x86_64-gnu-aux
@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Oct 16, 2025

💔 Test for 7103c01 failed: CI. Failed jobs:

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

GuillaumeGomez commented Oct 19, 2025

Just in case...

@bors try jobs=test-various

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 19, 2025
@rust-bors
Auto merge of #147674 - GuillaumeGomez:fix-compile_fail, r=<try>
e48e28b 
[rustdoc] Correctly handle `should_panic` doctest attribute and fix `--no-run` test flag on the 2024 edition

try-job: test-various
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

GuillaumeGomez commented Oct 19, 2025

@Kobzol: Do you know why we run stage1 library doctests?

@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Oct 19, 2025

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: e48e28b (e48e28b7bc81f2b9b2a5d8d7789be463df6a0b3e, parent: 33cab8c4c702d08f1d55997c5df70d7df8aa3b8b)

@Kobzol
Copy link
Member

Kobzol commented Oct 20, 2025

Because it's in our CI config 😆 Does it cause some issues?

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

GuillaumeGomez commented Oct 20, 2025 •
edited
Loading

I don't think so, I was just surprised to see some tests running with stage 1 and wondered if I broke something somehow. ^^'

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Oct 30, 2025

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #148280) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 30, 2025

This PR was rebased onto a different master commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

rust-log-analyzer commented Oct 31, 2025

The job pr-check-2 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez mentioned this pull request Nov 3, 2025
Open
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

GuillaumeGomez commented Nov 3, 2025

Closing in favour of #148444. I think it's not worth the effort to fix non-merged should_panic doctests.

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Nov 6, 2025

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #148560) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

@fmease fmease

Labels

A-run-make Area: port run-make Makefiles to rmake.rs S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Rustdoc --no-run runs when --edition=2024 is provided should_panic in doctests accepts crashes, aborts, std::process::exit

6 participants

@GuillaumeGomez @rustbot @rust-log-analyzer @Kobzol @bors @fmease