rustdoc: Remove the intra-doc links side channel #92601
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
camelid
added
A-intra-doc-links
|
Some changes occurred in cc @camelid |
rustbot
added
the
T-rustdoc
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
camelid
added
S-waiting-on-author
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
camelid
force-pushed
the
more-intra-doc-cleanup
branch
from
08f5c7d
to
456ba8b
Compare
camelid
added
S-waiting-on-review
camelid
changed the title
Urgau
reviewed
Jan 6, 2022
Manishearth
reviewed
Jan 6, 2022
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I think it makes the code easier to understand.
This is the next step in computing more "semantic" information during intra-doc link collection and then doing rendering all at the end.
This coalesces the checks into one place.
I had the epiphany that now that fragments are "semantic" -- rather than just strings -- they fill the role that used to be handled by the side channel. I think I may be able to get rid of the other uses of the side channel using this technique too.
camelid
force-pushed
the
more-intra-doc-cleanup
branch
from
d76cb99
to
cdde87f
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Hooray! It was no longer used, so it can just be deleted.
This allows eliminating branches in the code where a user-written fragment is impossible.
camelid
force-pushed
the
more-intra-doc-cleanup
branch
from
cdde87f
to
a626da4
Compare
Manishearth
approved these changes
Jan 6, 2022
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit a626da4 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 6, 2022
…anishearth rustdoc: Remove the intra-doc links side channel The side channel made the code much more complex and harder to understand. It was added as a temporary workaround in 0c99d80, but it's no longer necessary. The addition of `UrlFragment` in rust-lang#92088 was the key to getting rid of the side channel. The semantic information (rather than the strings that used to be used for fragments) that is now captured by `UrlFragment` is enough to obviate the side channel. An additional change had to be made to `UrlFragment` in this PR to make this possible: it now records `DefId`s rather than item names. This PR also consolidates the checks for anchor conflicts into one place. r? `@Manishearth`
|
@bors rollup=never (for perf and bisecting reasons) |
|
@bors p=1 (this is blocking two other PRs) |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
This was referenced Jan 11, 2022
|
Finished benchmarking commit (1f213d9): comparison url. Summary: This benchmark run did not return any relevant changes. If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf. @rustbot label: -perf-regression |
|
Slight improvements on doc benchmarks 🎉 |
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.
The side channel made the code much more complex and harder to
understand. It was added as a temporary workaround in
0c99d80, but it's no longer necessary.
The addition of
UrlFragmentin #92088 was the key to getting rid ofthe side channel. The semantic information (rather than the strings that
used to be used for fragments) that is now captured by
UrlFragmentisenough to obviate the side channel. An additional change had to be made
to
UrlFragmentin this PR to make this possible: it now recordsDefIds rather than item names.This PR also consolidates the checks for anchor conflicts into one place.
r? @Manishearth