This adds labels to the icons and moves them away from the search box.
These changes are made together, because they work together, but are based on
several complaints:
* The [+/-] thing are a Reddit-ism. They don't look like buttons, but look
like syntax
<https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/266220-t-rustdoc/topic/More.20visual.20difference.20for.20the.20.2B.2F-.20.20Icons>,
<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/59851>
(some of these are laundry lists with more suggestions, but they all
mention [+/-] looking wrong)
* The settings, help, and summary buttons are also too hard to recognize
<https://lwn.net/Articles/987070/>,
<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90310>,
<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/14475#issuecomment-274241997>,
<https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/improve-rustdoc-design/12758>
("Not all functionality is self-explanatory, for example the [+] button in
the top right corner, the theme picker or the settings button.")
The toggle-all and toggle-individual buttons both need done at once, since we
want them to look like they go together. This changes them from both being
[+/-] to both being arrows.
Settings and Help are also migrated, so that the whole group can benefit from
being described using actual words.
Additionally, the Help button is only shown on SERPs, not all the time.
This is done for two major reasons:
* Most of what's in there is search-related. The things that aren't are
keyboard commands, and the search box tells you about that anyway.
Pressing <kbd>?</kbd> will temporarily show the button and its popover.
* I'm trading it off by showing the help button, even on mobile.
It's useful since you can use the search engine suggestions there.
* The three buttons were causing line wrapping on too many desktop layouts.
This commit adds the headers for the top level documentation to
rustdoc's existing table of contents, along with associated items.
It only show two levels of headers. Going further would require the
sidebar to be wider, and that seems unnecessary (the crates that
have manually-built TOCs usually don't need deeply nested headers).
nested aux-build in tests/rustdoc/ tests
* Fixes bug that prevented using nested aux-build in `tests/rustdoc/` tests. Before, `fn document` and the auxiliary builder disagreed about where to find the nested aux-build source file (`auxiliary/auxiliary/aux.rs` vs `auxiliary/aux.rs`), preventing them from building. Picked the latter in line with other builders in compiletest.
* Adds `//@ doc-flags` header, which forwards flags to rustdoc and not rustc.
* Adds `//@ unique-doc-out-dir` header, which sets the --out-dir for the rustdoc invocation to a unique directory: `<root out dir>/docs/<test name>/doc`
* Changes working directory of the rustdoc invocation to the root out directory (common among all aux-builds). Prior art: exec_compiled_test in runtest.rs
* Adds tests that use nested aux builds and new headers
These changes provide useful capabilities for writing rustdoc tests on their own. They are also needed to test the implementation for the [mergable-rustdoc-cross-crate-info](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3662) RFC.
try-job: x86_64-msvc
This is an alternative to ee6459d652.
That is, it fixes the issue that affects the very long type names
in https://docs.rs/async-stripe/0.31.0/stripe/index.html#structs.
This is, necessarily, a pile of nasty heuristics.
We need to balance a few issues:
- Sometimes, there's no real word break.
For example, `BTreeMap` should be `BTree<wbr>Map`,
not `B<wbr>Tree<wbr>Map`.
- Sometimes, there's a legit word break,
but the name is tiny and the HTML overhead isn't worth it.
For example, if we're typesetting `TyCtx`,
writing `Ty<wbr>Ctx` would have an HTML overhead of 50%.
Line breaking inside it makes no sense.
Remove unnecessary impl sorting in queries and metadata
Removes unnecessary impl sorting because queries already return their keys in HIR definition order: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/120371#issuecomment-1926422838
r? `@cjgillot` or `@lcnr` -- unless I totally misunderstood what was being asked for here? 😆fixes#120371
Forbid borrows and unsized types from being used as the type of a const generic under `adt_const_params`
Fixes#112219Fixes#112124Fixes#112125
### Motivation
Currently the `adt_const_params` feature allows writing `Foo<const N: [u8]>` this is entirely useless as it is not possible to write an expression which evaluates to a type that is not `Sized`. In order to actually use unsized types in const generics they are typically written as `const N: &[u8]` which *is* possible to provide a value of.
Unfortunately allowing the types of const parameters to contain references is non trivial (#120961) as it introduces a number of difficult questions about how equality of references in the type system should behave. References in the types of const generics is largely only useful for using unsized types in const generics.
This PR introduces a new feature gate `unsized_const_parameters` and moves support for `const N: [u8]` and `const N: &...` from `adt_const_params` into it. The goal here hopefully is to experiment with allowing `const N: [u8]` to work without references and then eventually completely forbid references in const generics.
Splitting this out into a new feature gate means that stabilization of `adt_const_params` does not have to resolve#120961 which is the only remaining "big" blocker for the feature. Remaining issues after this are a few ICEs and naming bikeshed for `ConstParamTy`.
### Implementation
The implementation is slightly subtle here as we would like to ensure that a stabilization of `adt_const_params` is forwards compatible with any outcome of `unsized_const_parameters`. This is inherently tricky as we do not support unstable trait implementations and we determine whether a type is valid as the type of a const parameter via a trait bound.
There are a few constraints here:
- We would like to *allow for the possibility* of adding a `Sized` supertrait to `ConstParamTy` in the event that we wind up opting to not support unsized types and instead requiring people to write the 'sized version', e.g. `const N: [u8; M]` instead of `const N: [u8]`.
- Crates should be able to enable `unsized_const_parameters` and write trait implementations of `ConstParamTy` for `!Sized` types without downstream crates that only enable `adt_const_params` being able to observe this (required for std to be able to `impl<T> ConstParamTy for [T]`
Ultimately the way this is accomplished is via having two traits (sad), `ConstParamTy` and `UnsizedConstParamTy`. Depending on whether `unsized_const_parameters` is enabled or not we change which trait is used to check whether a type is allowed to be a const parameter.
Long term (when stabilizing `UnsizedConstParamTy`) it should be possible to completely merge these traits (and derive macros), only having a single `trait ConstParamTy` and `macro ConstParamTy`.
Under `adt_const_params` it is now illegal to directly refer to `ConstParamTy` it is only used as an internal impl detail by `derive(ConstParamTy)` and checking const parameters are well formed. This is necessary in order to ensure forwards compatibility with all possible future directions for `feature(unsized_const_parameters)`.
Generally the intuition here should be that `ConstParamTy` is the stable trait that everything uses, and `UnsizedConstParamTy` is that plus unstable implementations (well, I suppose `ConstParamTy` isn't stable yet :P).
