jyn
oh, i wonder if this is about absolute vs relative paths :/
i think the proper fix here is that rustdoc should use `to_embeddable_absolute_path` when `-Z ui-testing` is set. but i've already spent a bunch of time on this so i'm just...
reminder that i no longer have bors privileges and need someone else to approve :)
What about the opposite - having `#[doc(cfg(x))]` also imply `#[cfg(x)]`? I can't imagine a scenario where you wouldn't want to have that.
Not sure how hard that would be to implement, though - maybe @petrochenkov would know?
I think https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84437 needs to be fixed before stabilizing this. > Can't we have something like a feature-selector, a ui for selecting which feature to show? @aobatact the more features...
> One situation where it would be nice to have doc_cfg but doesn't currently seem to be feasible is on derive-generated implementations. Even if the provider of the derive wanted...
> So you can put #[doc(cfg)] on a module and it will show up on the types within (or at least used to), but only in some cases – again...
> I can't similarly annotate derived ones. I don't think this can be fixed on rustdoc's end; rust doesn't allow users to apply attributes to derived traits. We're planning to...
@rami3l i still think this suggestion from the description is the best approach: > `rustup set default-host foo` should behave the same as `rustup set default-host foo && rustup default...