Skip to content
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.

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

docs: fix incorrect docs in tracing_core::LevelFilter #1692

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 28, 2021

Conversation

davidbarsky
Copy link
Member

Resolves #1669. Namely, I:

  • fixed the incorrect docs on LevelFilter.
  • Removed a stray backtick on LevelFilter::current.
  • Added a matching backtick in Level's documentation.

I did not add example of comparing a level against a LevelFilter; I instead pointed readers to Level's documentation.

@davidbarsky davidbarsky requested review from hawkw and a team as code owners October 27, 2021 22:33
@davidbarsky davidbarsky changed the title docs: fix incorrect docs in tracing_core::LevelFilter; resolves #1669. docs: fix incorrect docs in tracing_core::LevelFilter; resolves #1669 Oct 27, 2021
tracing-core/src/metadata.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@hawkw hawkw changed the title docs: fix incorrect docs in tracing_core::LevelFilter; resolves #1669 docs: fix incorrect docs in tracing_core::LevelFilter Oct 27, 2021
Copy link
Member

@hawkw hawkw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

okay, looks good to me!

it would be nice to also be able to add the example @lilyball proposed, but we can do that in a follow-up PR

@hawkw hawkw merged commit 3bff502 into v0.1.x Oct 28, 2021
@hawkw hawkw deleted the davidbarsky/fix-levelfilter-docs branch October 28, 2021 17:41
@hawkw
Copy link
Member

hawkw commented Oct 28, 2021

oh, i just noticed this was a PR against v0.1.x, do we also need to fix this on master?

@davidbarsky
Copy link
Member Author

oh, i just noticed this was a PR against v0.1.x, do we also need to fix this on master?

yeah, this was intentional. i'll fix this on master.

davidbarsky added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2021
Resolves #1669. Namely, I:
- fixed the incorrect docs on `LevelFilter`.
- Removed a stray backtick on `LevelFilter::current`.
- Added a matching backtick in Level's documentation.

I did _not_ add example of comparing a level against a `LevelFilter`; I
instead pointed readers to Level's documentation.
hawkw pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2021
Resolves #1669. Namely, I:
- fixed the incorrect docs on `LevelFilter`.
- Removed a stray backtick on `LevelFilter::current`.
- Added a matching backtick in Level's documentation.

I did _not_ add example of comparing a level against a `LevelFilter`; I
instead pointed readers to Level's documentation.
hawkw added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2022
# 0.1.22 (February 3, 2022)

This release adds *experimental* support for recording structured field
values using the [`valuable`] crate. See [this blog post][post] for
details on `valuable`.

Note that `valuable` support currently requires `--cfg
tracing_unstable`. See the documentation for details.

### Added

- **field**: Experimental support for recording field values using the
  [`valuable`] crate ([#1608], [#1888], [#1887])
- **field**: Added `ValueSet::record` method ([#1823])
- **subscriber**: `Default` impl for `NoSubscriber` ([#1785])
- **metadata**: New `Kind::HINT` to support the `enabled!` macro in
  `tracing` ([#1883], [#1891])
### Fixed

- Fixed a number of documentation issues ([#1665], [#1692], [#1737])

Thanks to @xd009642, @Skepfyr, @guswynn, @Folyd, and @mbergkvist for
contributing to this release!
hawkw added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2022
# 0.1.22 (February 3, 2022)

This release adds *experimental* support for recording structured field
values using the [`valuable`] crate. See [this blog post][post] for
details on `valuable`.

Note that `valuable` support currently requires `--cfg
tracing_unstable`. See the documentation for details.

### Added

- **field**: Experimental support for recording field values using the
  [`valuable`] crate ([#1608], [#1888], [#1887])
- **field**: Added `ValueSet::record` method ([#1823])
- **subscriber**: `Default` impl for `NoSubscriber` ([#1785])
- **metadata**: New `Kind::HINT` to support the `enabled!` macro in
  `tracing` ([#1883], [#1891])
### Fixed

- Fixed a number of documentation issues ([#1665], [#1692], [#1737])

Thanks to @xd009642, @Skepfyr, @guswynn, @Folyd, and @mbergkvist for
contributing to this release!

[`valuable`]: https://crates.io/crates/valuable
[post]: https://tokio.rs/blog/2021-05-valuable
[#1608]: #1608
[#1888]: #1888
[#1887]: #1887
[#1823]: #1823
[#1785]: #1785
[#1883]: #1883
[#1891]: #1891
[#1665]: #1665
[#1692]: #1692
[#1737]: #1737
kaffarell pushed a commit to kaffarell/tracing that referenced this pull request May 22, 2024
# 0.1.22 (February 3, 2022)

This release adds *experimental* support for recording structured field
values using the [`valuable`] crate. See [this blog post][post] for
details on `valuable`.

Note that `valuable` support currently requires `--cfg
tracing_unstable`. See the documentation for details.

### Added

- **field**: Experimental support for recording field values using the
  [`valuable`] crate ([tokio-rs#1608], [tokio-rs#1888], [tokio-rs#1887])
- **field**: Added `ValueSet::record` method ([tokio-rs#1823])
- **subscriber**: `Default` impl for `NoSubscriber` ([tokio-rs#1785])
- **metadata**: New `Kind::HINT` to support the `enabled!` macro in
  `tracing` ([tokio-rs#1883], [tokio-rs#1891])
### Fixed

- Fixed a number of documentation issues ([tokio-rs#1665], [tokio-rs#1692], [tokio-rs#1737])

Thanks to @xd009642, @Skepfyr, @guswynn, @Folyd, and @mbergkvist for
contributing to this release!

[`valuable`]: https://crates.io/crates/valuable
[post]: https://tokio.rs/blog/2021-05-valuable
[tokio-rs#1608]: tokio-rs#1608
[tokio-rs#1888]: tokio-rs#1888
[tokio-rs#1887]: tokio-rs#1887
[tokio-rs#1823]: tokio-rs#1823
[tokio-rs#1785]: tokio-rs#1785
[tokio-rs#1883]: tokio-rs#1883
[tokio-rs#1891]: tokio-rs#1891
[tokio-rs#1665]: tokio-rs#1665
[tokio-rs#1692]: tokio-rs#1692
[tokio-rs#1737]: tokio-rs#1737
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants