I created an issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/64193 month ago and there's no progress at all up to 8 october. The problem is that intra-rustdoc-links don't work correctly.
Now these links (for ex.)
try_send, channeldon't redirect to correct destination, moreover in some places without context reader can't understand method of which trait/impl/mod is mentioned.
If change them to the full path, we will get warnings (see issue), however links will work. Maybe it's ok for now to have warnings but correctly working links? I could prepare PR with expanded links.
This seems to be somewhat related to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/60883, the link from futures_channel::mpsc::TrySendError works, but the link from futures::channel::mpsc::TrySendError doesn't.
Applying the suggested change to use an absolute path (mpsc::Sender::try_send) inverts that, the link in the futures docs will start working while the link in futures-channel will stop working (which is why there is a warning emitted). I really don't understand why this is, the absolute path is only valid in futures-channel, so how come it works in the opposite case?
I don't understand why there's no warning emitted currently though. I was scared of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/58917 causing warnings for cases like this to be suppressed, but that never got merged, so it should be emitting a warning when building the futures docs that it can't resolve the link...
I didn't pay attention that link from futures_channel::channel::mpsc::TrySendError won't work after changing to absolute path, so then we have 1 correct warning at least.
This's especially strange because after change to futures_channel::mpsc::Receiver::try_next() link from futures::... will work normally, however link from futures_channel::... won't resolve but will generate incorrect url (which is a link with prefix and unresolved path).
I think this should be fixed now that https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65983 has been fixed :)
Confirmed this has been fixed 馃帀
Most helpful comment
I think this should be fixed now that https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65983 has been fixed :)