docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments by AudaciousAxiom · Pull Request #146136 · rust-lang/rust

AudaciousAxiom · 2025-09-02T21:00:15Z

This PR adds a few closing code block fences which I believe are missing in some doc comments. It seems that rustdoc just autocloses code blocks at the end of doc comments and thus these were easily overlooked: I do not think these code blocks are special in any way.

I found these when working on a Clippy lint that checks the last sentence of doc comments for terminal punctuation, and these were failing cases when testing against the std. Therefore I am not entirely sure these are all such cases, but still have high hopes that they are (or at least a well-defined subset of them).

rustbot · 2025-09-02T21:00:20Z

r? @scottmcm

rustbot has assigned @scottmcm.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

rustbot · 2025-09-02T21:00:22Z

Portable SIMD is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/portable-simd instead.

cc @calebzulawski, @programmerjake

AudaciousAxiom · 2025-09-02T21:04:14Z

Seems like the changes to library/portable-simd should be done in rust-lang/portable-simd instead. I'll try to find to find some time for that tomorrow.

calebzulawski · 2025-09-02T21:08:36Z

This is a pretty harmless change to merge straight to rust-lang/rust, no need to do it in the portable-simd repo separately

tgross35 · 2025-09-02T23:47:14Z

Thank you!
r? tgross35
@bors r+ rollup

bors · 2025-09-02T23:47:18Z

📌 Commit 5a9e2e4 has been approved by tgross35

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…g-code-block-fences, r=tgross35 docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments This PR adds a few closing code block fences which I believe are missing in some doc comments. It seems that rustdoc just autocloses code blocks at the end of doc comments and thus these were easily overlooked: I do not think these code blocks are special in any way. I found these when working on a Clippy lint that checks the last sentence of doc comments for terminal punctuation, and these were failing cases when testing against the std. Therefore I am not entirely sure these are all such cases, but still have high hopes that they are (or at least a well-defined subset of them).

Rollup of 15 pull requests Successful merges: - #143725 (core: add Peekable::next_if_map) - #145209 (Stabilize `path_add_extension`) - #145750 (raw_vec.rs: Remove superfluous fn alloc_guard) - #145962 (Ensure we emit an allocator shim when only some crate types need one) - #145963 (Add LSX accelerated implementation for source file analysis) - #146054 (add `#[must_use]` to `array::repeat`) - #146090 (Derive `PartialEq` for `InvisibleOrigin`) - #146120 (Correct typo in `rustc_errors` comment) - #146127 (Rename `ToolRustc` to `ToolRustcPrivate`) - #146131 (rustdoc-search: add test case for indexing every item type) - #146133 (Revert "Make `lto` and `linker-plugin-lto` work the same for `compiler_builtins`) - #146134 (llvm: nvptx: Layout update to match LLVM) - #146136 (docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments) - #146137 (Disallow frontmatter in `--cfg` and `--check-cfg` arguments) - #146140 (compiletest: cygwin follows windows in using PATH for dynamic libraries) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

…g-code-block-fences, r=tgross35 docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments This PR adds a few closing code block fences which I believe are missing in some doc comments. It seems that rustdoc just autocloses code blocks at the end of doc comments and thus these were easily overlooked: I do not think these code blocks are special in any way. I found these when working on a Clippy lint that checks the last sentence of doc comments for terminal punctuation, and these were failing cases when testing against the std. Therefore I am not entirely sure these are all such cases, but still have high hopes that they are (or at least a well-defined subset of them).

Rollup of 16 pull requests Successful merges: - #143725 (core: add Peekable::next_if_map) - #145209 (Stabilize `path_add_extension`) - #145342 (fix drop scope for `super let` bindings within `if let`) - #145750 (raw_vec.rs: Remove superfluous fn alloc_guard) - #145962 (Ensure we emit an allocator shim when only some crate types need one) - #145963 (Add LSX accelerated implementation for source file analysis) - #146054 (add `#[must_use]` to `array::repeat`) - #146090 (Derive `PartialEq` for `InvisibleOrigin`) - #146120 (Correct typo in `rustc_errors` comment) - #146127 (Rename `ToolRustc` to `ToolRustcPrivate`) - #146133 (Revert "Make `lto` and `linker-plugin-lto` work the same for `compiler_builtins`) - #146134 (llvm: nvptx: Layout update to match LLVM) - #146136 (docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments) - #146137 (Disallow frontmatter in `--cfg` and `--check-cfg` arguments) - #146140 (compiletest: cygwin follows windows in using PATH for dynamic libraries) - #146156 (miri subtree update) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

Rollup of 24 pull requests Successful merges: - #140459 (Add `read_buf` equivalents for positioned reads) - #143725 (core: add Peekable::next_if_map) - #145209 (Stabilize `path_add_extension`) - #145342 (fix drop scope for `super let` bindings within `if let`) - #145750 (raw_vec.rs: Remove superfluous fn alloc_guard) - #145827 (On unused binding or binding not present in all patterns, suggest potential typo of unit struct/variant or const) - #145932 (Allow `inline(always)` with a target feature behind a unstable feature `target_feature_inline_always`.) - #145962 (Ensure we emit an allocator shim when only some crate types need one) - #145963 (Add LSX accelerated implementation for source file analysis) - #146054 (add `#[must_use]` to `array::repeat`) - #146090 (Derive `PartialEq` for `InvisibleOrigin`) - #146112 (don't uppercase error messages) - #146120 (Correct typo in `rustc_errors` comment) - #146124 (Test `rustc-dev` in `distcheck`) - #146127 (Rename `ToolRustc` to `ToolRustcPrivate`) - #146131 (rustdoc-search: add test case for indexing every item type) - #146134 (llvm: nvptx: Layout update to match LLVM) - #146136 (docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments) - #146137 (Disallow frontmatter in `--cfg` and `--check-cfg` arguments) - #146140 (compiletest: cygwin follows windows in using PATH for dynamic libraries) - #146150 (fix(rustdoc): match rustc `--emit` precedence ) - #146155 (Make bootstrap self test parallel) - #146161 ([rustdoc] Uncomment code to add scraped rustdoc examples in loaded paths) - #146172 (triagebot: configure some pings when certain attributes are used) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

Rollup merge of #146136 - AudaciousAxiom:docs/missing-closing-code-block-fences, r=tgross35 docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments This PR adds a few closing code block fences which I believe are missing in some doc comments. It seems that rustdoc just autocloses code blocks at the end of doc comments and thus these were easily overlooked: I do not think these code blocks are special in any way. I found these when working on a Clippy lint that checks the last sentence of doc comments for terminal punctuation, and these were failing cases when testing against the std. Therefore I am not entirely sure these are all such cases, but still have high hopes that they are (or at least a well-defined subset of them).

Rollup of 24 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#140459 (Add `read_buf` equivalents for positioned reads) - rust-lang/rust#143725 (core: add Peekable::next_if_map) - rust-lang/rust#145209 (Stabilize `path_add_extension`) - rust-lang/rust#145342 (fix drop scope for `super let` bindings within `if let`) - rust-lang/rust#145750 (raw_vec.rs: Remove superfluous fn alloc_guard) - rust-lang/rust#145827 (On unused binding or binding not present in all patterns, suggest potential typo of unit struct/variant or const) - rust-lang/rust#145932 (Allow `inline(always)` with a target feature behind a unstable feature `target_feature_inline_always`.) - rust-lang/rust#145962 (Ensure we emit an allocator shim when only some crate types need one) - rust-lang/rust#145963 (Add LSX accelerated implementation for source file analysis) - rust-lang/rust#146054 (add `#[must_use]` to `array::repeat`) - rust-lang/rust#146090 (Derive `PartialEq` for `InvisibleOrigin`) - rust-lang/rust#146112 (don't uppercase error messages) - rust-lang/rust#146120 (Correct typo in `rustc_errors` comment) - rust-lang/rust#146124 (Test `rustc-dev` in `distcheck`) - rust-lang/rust#146127 (Rename `ToolRustc` to `ToolRustcPrivate`) - rust-lang/rust#146131 (rustdoc-search: add test case for indexing every item type) - rust-lang/rust#146134 (llvm: nvptx: Layout update to match LLVM) - rust-lang/rust#146136 (docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments) - rust-lang/rust#146137 (Disallow frontmatter in `--cfg` and `--check-cfg` arguments) - rust-lang/rust#146140 (compiletest: cygwin follows windows in using PATH for dynamic libraries) - rust-lang/rust#146150 (fix(rustdoc): match rustc `--emit` precedence ) - rust-lang/rust#146155 (Make bootstrap self test parallel) - rust-lang/rust#146161 ([rustdoc] Uncomment code to add scraped rustdoc examples in loaded paths) - rust-lang/rust#146172 (triagebot: configure some pings when certain attributes are used) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

…g-code-block-fences, r=tgross35 docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments This PR adds a few closing code block fences which I believe are missing in some doc comments. It seems that rustdoc just autocloses code blocks at the end of doc comments and thus these were easily overlooked: I do not think these code blocks are special in any way. I found these when working on a Clippy lint that checks the last sentence of doc comments for terminal punctuation, and these were failing cases when testing against the std. Therefore I am not entirely sure these are all such cases, but still have high hopes that they are (or at least a well-defined subset of them).

Rollup of 24 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#140459 (Add `read_buf` equivalents for positioned reads) - rust-lang#143725 (core: add Peekable::next_if_map) - rust-lang#145209 (Stabilize `path_add_extension`) - rust-lang#145342 (fix drop scope for `super let` bindings within `if let`) - rust-lang#145750 (raw_vec.rs: Remove superfluous fn alloc_guard) - rust-lang#145827 (On unused binding or binding not present in all patterns, suggest potential typo of unit struct/variant or const) - rust-lang#145932 (Allow `inline(always)` with a target feature behind a unstable feature `target_feature_inline_always`.) - rust-lang#145962 (Ensure we emit an allocator shim when only some crate types need one) - rust-lang#145963 (Add LSX accelerated implementation for source file analysis) - rust-lang#146054 (add `#[must_use]` to `array::repeat`) - rust-lang#146090 (Derive `PartialEq` for `InvisibleOrigin`) - rust-lang#146112 (don't uppercase error messages) - rust-lang#146120 (Correct typo in `rustc_errors` comment) - rust-lang#146124 (Test `rustc-dev` in `distcheck`) - rust-lang#146127 (Rename `ToolRustc` to `ToolRustcPrivate`) - rust-lang#146131 (rustdoc-search: add test case for indexing every item type) - rust-lang#146134 (llvm: nvptx: Layout update to match LLVM) - rust-lang#146136 (docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments) - rust-lang#146137 (Disallow frontmatter in `--cfg` and `--check-cfg` arguments) - rust-lang#146140 (compiletest: cygwin follows windows in using PATH for dynamic libraries) - rust-lang#146150 (fix(rustdoc): match rustc `--emit` precedence ) - rust-lang#146155 (Make bootstrap self test parallel) - rust-lang#146161 ([rustdoc] Uncomment code to add scraped rustdoc examples in loaded paths) - rust-lang#146172 (triagebot: configure some pings when certain attributes are used) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

This introduces a new lint that aims to check for missing terminal punctuation in doc comments. ## Lint scope and motivation It partially addresses #8371 by currently focusing on the case that is both the easiest to look for without advanced NLP capacities and still very useful: missing punctuation at the end of the last sentence of doc comments. This is particularly useful when working in a team to enforce a style guide and make sure all doc comments end with some kind of punctuation, which is often forgotten in the case of short, single-sentence doc comments. The lint is biased towards avoiding false positives so it can be easily adopted without requiring an excessive number of `#[expect]` attributes. It is currently only concerned with Latin languages, but adding support for `。` for instance should be very easy. Even if consistently ending doc comments (even very short ones) with punctuation is somewhat of an opinion, it seems sufficiently well-established, [at least in the `std`](rust-lang/rust#91886), to warrant its own lint, even if of course it would be allow-by-default. ## Lint category and possible evolution Because it is unclear how useful and more complex it would be to also look for missing punctuation at the end of *each* Markdown paragraphs, I opted for the `nursery` category for now. My understanding of [the stability guarantees](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2476-clippy-uno.md#stability-guarantees) is that would it not be acceptable to add such capability later if it was part of `pedantic` or `restriction` categories right away. I tried to make sure the lint name allows this kind of iterative evolution. ## Testing I ran the lint against the `core` library which led me to introduce a few special cases (which seem common enough) to avoid false positives: e.g., the last sentence being in parentheses. After excluding specific modules which should likely be excluded (e.g., `core_arch`, `intrinsincs`), it currently finds a bit more than 200 errors in the `core` library. This lint also helped find issues with a few doc comments, which [are now fixed](rust-lang/rust#146136). ## How to review this PR I suppose it is easier to have a look at the UI tests first before checking the implementation. --- *Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)* changelog: add new lint [`doc_paragraphs_missing_punctuation`]

Rollup of 24 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#140459 (Add `read_buf` equivalents for positioned reads) - rust-lang/rust#143725 (core: add Peekable::next_if_map) - rust-lang/rust#145209 (Stabilize `path_add_extension`) - rust-lang/rust#145342 (fix drop scope for `super let` bindings within `if let`) - rust-lang/rust#145750 (raw_vec.rs: Remove superfluous fn alloc_guard) - rust-lang/rust#145827 (On unused binding or binding not present in all patterns, suggest potential typo of unit struct/variant or const) - rust-lang/rust#145932 (Allow `inline(always)` with a target feature behind a unstable feature `target_feature_inline_always`.) - rust-lang/rust#145962 (Ensure we emit an allocator shim when only some crate types need one) - rust-lang/rust#145963 (Add LSX accelerated implementation for source file analysis) - rust-lang/rust#146054 (add `#[must_use]` to `array::repeat`) - rust-lang/rust#146090 (Derive `PartialEq` for `InvisibleOrigin`) - rust-lang/rust#146112 (don't uppercase error messages) - rust-lang/rust#146120 (Correct typo in `rustc_errors` comment) - rust-lang/rust#146124 (Test `rustc-dev` in `distcheck`) - rust-lang/rust#146127 (Rename `ToolRustc` to `ToolRustcPrivate`) - rust-lang/rust#146131 (rustdoc-search: add test case for indexing every item type) - rust-lang/rust#146134 (llvm: nvptx: Layout update to match LLVM) - rust-lang/rust#146136 (docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments) - rust-lang/rust#146137 (Disallow frontmatter in `--cfg` and `--check-cfg` arguments) - rust-lang/rust#146140 (compiletest: cygwin follows windows in using PATH for dynamic libraries) - rust-lang/rust#146150 (fix(rustdoc): match rustc `--emit` precedence ) - rust-lang/rust#146155 (Make bootstrap self test parallel) - rust-lang/rust#146161 ([rustdoc] Uncomment code to add scraped rustdoc examples in loaded paths) - rust-lang/rust#146172 (triagebot: configure some pings when certain attributes are used) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments
5a9e2e4

rustbot assigned scottmcm Sep 2, 2025

rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Sep 2, 2025

tgross35 approved these changes Sep 2, 2025
View reviewed changes

rustbot assigned tgross35 Sep 2, 2025

rustbot unassigned scottmcm Sep 2, 2025

bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Sep 2, 2025

tgross35 mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2025
Rollup of 9 pull requests #146142
Closed

jhpratt mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2025
Rollup of 15 pull requests #146153
Closed

Zalathar mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2025
Rollup of 16 pull requests #146158
Closed

Zalathar mentioned this pull request Sep 4, 2025
Rollup of 24 pull requests #146185
Merged

bors merged commit b27c94a into rust-lang:masterSep 4, 2025
10 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.91.0 milestone Sep 4, 2025

AudaciousAxiom deleted the docs/missing-closing-code-block-fences branch September 6, 2025 09:06

AudaciousAxiom mentioned this pull request Sep 24, 2025
Add a doc_paragraphs_missing_punctuation lint rust-lang/rust-clippy#15758
Merged

Navigation Menu

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments - #146136

docs(std): add missing closing code block fences in doc comments#146136
bors merged 1 commit into
rust-lang:masterfrom
AudaciousAxiom:docs/missing-closing-code-block-fences

AudaciousAxiom commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

AudaciousAxiom commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

calebzulawski commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

tgross35 commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

AudaciousAxiom commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

AudaciousAxiom commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

calebzulawski commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

tgross35 commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Sep 2, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants