search

steveklabnik / rustdoc

Not a real thing, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust for rustdoc's actual source code
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust
104 stars 22 forks source link

Does `rls-analysis` support everything we need? #7

Open steveklabnik opened 7 years ago

steveklabnik commented 7 years ago

Upstream wants to work with us, but we haven't actually determined if we need anything yet.

This quest issue is both broad and specific. Someone wanting to close it out should:

  1. Work through all of the different kinds of information that we need out of rls-analysis.
  2. Inspect its API to figure out if it all exists or not.

If we don't have all of the stuff we need, we'll have to open issues with upstream and work with them to get the information landed.

dzamlo commented 7 years ago

After a quick look at generated JSON, it looks like the exported macros (and their doc comments) are not included.

But I'm not familiar enough with the save-analysis part of rust to be sure if this is a mistake on my part or if this is really not included.

euclio commented 7 years ago

@steveklabnik It seems that rls-analysis does not export the visibility of items? We shouldn't be documenting private items :) (Found this while working on a PR for just that)

steveklabnik commented 7 years ago

yeah, we should at least know if something is public or private; sounds like an important thing to sort out

typesanitizer commented 7 years ago

@euclio , it would be nice to be able to document private definitions too. Earlier discussion https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15347

mgattozzi commented 6 years ago

We ran into some issues implementing the DefKinds. The discussion was here. Essentially, rls-analysis still needs to be expanded for other items so we can implement everything.

euclio commented 6 years ago

We will not be able to support pub use and reexports until https://github.com/nrc/rls-analysis/issues/123 is fixed.