Tracking Issue for `rustdoc::missing_doc_code_examples`

[Nemo157]

This is a tracking issue for the lint rustdoc::missing_doc_code_examples. The feature gate for the issue is #![feature(rustdoc_missing_doc_code_examples)].

About tracking issues

Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation. They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions. A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature. Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.

Steps

• [x] Implement the lint https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/54349
• [ ] Adjust documentation (see instructions on rustc-dev-guide)
• [ ] Stabilization PR (see instructions on rustc-dev-guide)

Unresolved Questions

• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/77230
• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87858

Implementation history

• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/54349
• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74855
• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/75776
• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/76212
• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/76716
• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80527
• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/88735
• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/88745
• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/90098

[jplatte]

When this lands, could there be a new lint group like rustdoc::all that activates all non-"restriction" rustdoc lints? All the current lints in from https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustdoc/lints.html are very useful to deny in CI, but this one obviously isn't (for most people).

[peter-lyons-kehl]

Please add #109592 and its PR (if accepted), and #109601.

[peter-lyons-kehl]

@jplatte FYI related to rustdoc::all

• 87858, and

• rustdoc::all in src/librustdoc/lint.rs -> register_lints(...): https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/librustdoc/lint.rs#L195.