jq directives for jsondocck by kohsine · Pull Request #158269 · rust-lang/rust

kohsine · 2026-06-22T20:55:13Z

Adds jq directives for jsondocck.

I decided to add jq instead of replacing jsonpath entirely so that migration could happen incrementally. In theory, it should be possible to replace every jsonpath test case with the new jq directives. Moving forward, this might put more burden on reviewers as test case writers would have the option to use jq or jsonpath or even both. ~~Note that you cannot use jq_set with jsonpath directives or set with jq directives~~. Diff should be reviewed without whitespace.

r? @aDotInTheVoid

rustbot · 2026-06-22T20:55:16Z

The list of allowed third-party dependencies may have been modified! You must ensure that any new dependencies have compatible licenses before merging.

cc @davidtwco, @wesleywiser

compiletest directives have been modified. Please add or update docs for the
new or modified directive in src/doc/rustc-dev-guide/.

Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest

cc @jieyouxu

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

These commits modify tests/rustdoc-json.
rustdoc-json is a public (but unstable) interface.

Please ensure that if you've changed the output:

It's intentional.
The FORMAT_VERSION in src/librustdoc-json-types is bumped if necessary.

cc @aDotInTheVoid, @obi1kenobi

rustbot · 2026-06-22T20:55:18Z

Failed to set assignee to aDotInTheVoid: invalid assignee

Note: Only org members with at least the repository "read" role, users with write permissions, or people who have commented on the PR may be assigned.

aDotInTheVoid

Thanks for working on this! This is a really good start.

This should also update the docs in src/doc/rustc-dev-guide/src/rustdoc-internals/rustdoc-json-test-suite.md

Also, I know we don't have them at the moment, but it would be nice to have unit-tests for this. (Grep for jsondoclint for details about how to wire them into the overall build/ci system).

Finally, I can't review/approve this (rust-lang/team#2523), someone still on the rustdoc team will have to.

View changes since this review

aDotInTheVoid · 2026-06-22T21:54:17Z

r? @lolbinarycat (Discussed this at all-hands, feel free to re-assign).

CC @fmease (Also discussed vague ideas about rustdoc testing)

rustbot · 2026-06-22T21:54:21Z

lolbinarycat is currently at their maximum review capacity.
They may take a while to respond.

kohsine · 2026-06-23T20:01:44Z

Mirrored the jsonpath directives for jq except for has <path> and !has <path> which are useless because jq returns null for both non-existent paths and existent paths with null values.

Conversions from has "$.foo.bar" will probably look like jq_is '.foo | has("bar")' true.

Conversions from !has "$.foo.bar" will probably look like jq_is '.foo | has("bar")' false.

Unfortunately this means that we lose error messages from !has <path>. has <path> didn't have good error messages in the first place. We still get good error messages from all the other directives though.

davidtwco

License/dependency changes look fine

View changes since this review

lolbinarycat

One big design concern (the two variable namespaces), and a bunch of potential readability and diagnostic improvements.

Would be nice if the new directives could be added to rustc-dev-guide under rustdoc-json-test-suite, but that can also be done as a followup.

View changes since this review

lolbinarycat · 2026-07-07T19:07:35Z

@rustbot author

rustbot · 2026-07-07T19:07:40Z

Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use @rustbot ready.

lolbinarycat · 2026-07-08T17:07:39Z

looking good! just merge the variable namespaces, then squash the commits down to something more reasonable, and it should be good to merge.

Co-authored-by: lolbinarycat <dogedoge61+github@gmail.com>

kohsine · 2026-07-08T21:05:46Z

@rustbot ready

lolbinarycat · 2026-07-10T22:23:29Z

Thanks!

@bors r+

rust-bors · 2026-07-10T22:23:32Z

📌 Commit 3ed6acb has been approved by lolbinarycat

It is now in the queue for this repository.

Rollup of 15 pull requests Successful merges: - #159106 (Update LLVM) - #157690 (codegen_ssa: pack small const aggregates into immediate stores) - #159005 (Use `as_lang_item` instead of repeatedly matching) - #156735 (Move NativeLib::filename to the rmeta-link archive member) - #157153 (allow `Allocator`s to be used as `#[global_allocator]`s) - #158269 (jq directives for jsondocck) - #158767 (merge DefKind::InlineConst into AnonConst) - #159099 (Stabilize String::from_utf8_lossy_owned) - #158930 (Reorganize `tests/ui/issues` [20/N]) - #158965 (Add codegen test for Result is_ok unwrap) - #158979 (Reorganize `tests/ui/issues` [21/N]) - #159050 (assert only opaques with sub unified hidden infer are non-rigid) - #159062 (Remove unused WEAK_ONLY_LANG_ITEMS static) - #159070 (Add `io::ErrorKind::InputOutputError`) - #159092 (make volatile operations const)

@aDotInTheVoid

Rollup merge of #158269 - kohsine:add-jq, r=lolbinarycat jq directives for jsondocck Closes#142479. Adds `jq` directives for `jsondocck`. I decided to add jq instead of replacing jsonpath entirely so that migration could happen incrementally. In theory, it should be possible to replace every jsonpath test case with the new `jq` directives. Moving forward, this might put more burden on reviewers as test case writers would have the option to use jq or jsonpath or even both. ~~Note that you cannot use `jq_set` with jsonpath directives or `set` with jq directives~~. Diff should be reviewed without whitespace. r? @aDotInTheVoid

lolbinarycat · 2026-07-11T15:30:16Z

hey, I was working on writing the docs for this when I noticed some more issues:

jq_has does not support the single argument mode
!count and !jq_count do not exist, but are listed in KNOWN_JSONDOCCK_DIRECTIVE_NAMES

kohsine · 2026-07-11T15:55:48Z

jq_has does not support the single argument mode

jq_has <filter> is useless because jq returns [null] on both existent path with value null and non-existent path. Unlike jsonpath that returns [null] on existent path with value null and returns [] on non-existent path. i.e. with jq the code can't tell whether the path exists and has null value or doesn't exist at all but the whole point of the has directive is to check for path existence.

Test writers will have to do something like jq_is '.foo | has("bar")' true to check for path existence. Unfortunately this means error messages will get swallowed by jq for this directive.

!count and !jq_count do not exist, but are listed in KNOWN_JSONDOCCK_DIRECTIVE_NAMES

Sorry, I think I just copy and pasted the jsonpath directives without really checking. It does seem that !count and !jq_count are not being used.

Rollup of 15 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#159106 (Update LLVM) - rust-lang/rust#157690 (codegen_ssa: pack small const aggregates into immediate stores) - rust-lang/rust#159005 (Use `as_lang_item` instead of repeatedly matching) - rust-lang/rust#156735 (Move NativeLib::filename to the rmeta-link archive member) - rust-lang/rust#157153 (allow `Allocator`s to be used as `#[global_allocator]`s) - rust-lang/rust#158269 (jq directives for jsondocck) - rust-lang/rust#158767 (merge DefKind::InlineConst into AnonConst) - rust-lang/rust#159099 (Stabilize String::from_utf8_lossy_owned) - rust-lang/rust#158930 (Reorganize `tests/ui/issues` [20/N]) - rust-lang/rust#158965 (Add codegen test for Result is_ok unwrap) - rust-lang/rust#158979 (Reorganize `tests/ui/issues` [21/N]) - rust-lang/rust#159050 (assert only opaques with sub unified hidden infer are non-rigid) - rust-lang/rust#159062 (Remove unused WEAK_ONLY_LANG_ITEMS static) - rust-lang/rust#159070 (Add `io::ErrorKind::InputOutputError`) - rust-lang/rust#159092 (make volatile operations const)

rustbot added A-compiletest Area: The compiletest test runner A-rustdoc-json Area: Rustdoc JSON backend A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc labels Jun 22, 2026

aDotInTheVoid reviewed Jun 22, 2026
View reviewed changes

Comment threadsrc/tools/jsondocck/src/directive.rs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/jsondocck/src/directive.rs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/jsondocck/src/directive.rs Outdated

rustbot assigned lolbinarycat Jun 22, 2026

kohsine requested a review from aDotInTheVoid June 23, 2026 20:02

kohsine changed the title ~~jq and jqset directives~~jq directives for jsondocckJun 23, 2026

davidtwco reviewed Jul 2, 2026
View reviewed changes

lolbinarycat reviewed Jul 7, 2026
View reviewed changes

rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jul 7, 2026

This comment has been minimized.
Sign in to view

kohsine force-pushed the add-jq branch from 5515388 to 70ec335Compare July 8, 2026 19:14

jq directives for jsondocck
3ed6acb
Co-authored-by: lolbinarycat <dogedoge61+github@gmail.com>

kohsine force-pushed the add-jq branch from 70ec335 to 3ed6acbCompare July 8, 2026 19:15

rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jul 8, 2026

rust-borsBot 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 Jul 10, 2026

jhpratt mentioned this pull request Jul 11, 2026
Rollup of 15 pull requests #159113
Merged

rust-borsBot merged commit 5b0d5c2 into rust-lang:mainJul 11, 2026
13 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.99.0 milestone Jul 11, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

kohsine commented Jun 22, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

aDotInTheVoid left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

aDotInTheVoid commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

kohsine commented Jun 23, 2026• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

davidtwco left a comment • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lolbinarycat left a comment • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

lolbinarycat commented Jul 7, 2026

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jul 7, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

lolbinarycat commented Jul 8, 2026

Uh oh!

kohsine commented Jul 8, 2026

Uh oh!

lolbinarycat commented Jul 10, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-borsBot commented Jul 10, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

lolbinarycat commented Jul 11, 2026

Uh oh!

kohsine commented Jul 11, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

kohsine commented Jun 22, 2026•
edited
Loading

aDotInTheVoid left a comment •
edited
Loading

kohsine commented Jun 23, 2026•
edited
Loading

davidtwco left a comment •
edited by rustbot
Loading

lolbinarycat left a comment •
edited by rustbot
Loading