Warnings for missing documentations.#6715
Conversation
|
This is a nice idea :). I think it should only be triggered on public functions/methods/fields though. |
|
I was thinking about the same :) |
|
I like this idea, but right now, it'd throw so many warnings as to obscure everything else. I do think that right now, it'd be good to have this available as some sort of report. |
|
Maybe add a feature to lint to be able to redirect certain kind of warnings to a file? The amount of warnings is the reason why it is turned off by default. |
|
That seems really complex, though I'd like for someone from Mozilla to weigh in here. |
|
@steveklabnik: we can enable this module-by-module |
|
Yeah, I'm ok with this. We accepted it as a part of arriving at the "well covered" milestone (i.e. "having enough machinery around to measure production-readiness"). We don't have to have it turned on by default. It's a tool. Thanks! |
Preliminary implementation for: #6275 This is my first (non hello world) rust code, so it may not be idiomatic.
…r=camsteffen added new lint `owned_to_owned` Adding new lint `owned_to_owned` Creating draft PR to have this looked over. I think this takes all advice I received into account. I did have to update the `redundant_clone` test to ignore this lint -- I felt that was the safest action. closes: rust-lang#6715 changelog: added new lint `implicit_clone`
5 participants
Preliminary implementation for: #6275
This is my first (non hello world) rust code, so it may not be idiomatic.