Skip to content

rustdoc: Fix search-index entry for inherent-associated-const #31596

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 13, 2016

Conversation

mitaa
Copy link
Contributor

@mitaa mitaa commented Feb 12, 2016

No description provided.

Normal constants have their own page while associated constants are
embedded within their parent-items page.
Search results use the mapping found in `ItemType::to_static_str` for
the identifier, which could not be found on the page in the case of
associated items.
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @nikomatsakis

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@mitaa
Copy link
Contributor Author

mitaa commented Feb 12, 2016

r? @alexcrichton

@mitaa
Copy link
Contributor Author

mitaa commented Feb 12, 2016

I've noticed that associated types, unlike associated consts, in impls are not recorded in the search-index because of noisy search results.

Right now inherent-associated-types don't work yet but I would imagine that whatever solution is applied to them should be used for inherent-associated-constants too.

edit: (there is currently no distinction between an implemented associated-item from a trait and an inherent-associated-item)

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: r+ 938202c

Thanks!

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 13, 2016

⌛ Testing commit 938202c with merge c438802...

@bors bors merged commit 938202c into rust-lang:master Feb 13, 2016
@mitaa mitaa deleted the rdoc_assoc_item branch February 14, 2016 04:27
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.

5 participants