[rustdoc] Correctly handle output options with --show-coverage by GuillaumeGomez · Pull Request #159411 · rust-lang/rust

GuillaumeGomez · 2026-07-16T21:36:36Z

The -o option was ignored with --show-coverage. This PR takes it into account and makes it closer to how these options are handled in the rest of rustdoc.

Considering calculate_doc_coverage was never really a pass and that I needed RenderOptions (for the -o option), I moved it out of passes.

r? @camelid

rustbot · 2026-07-16T21:36:41Z

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

GuillaumeGomez · 2026-07-16T21:36:59Z

Ah, maybe @Urgau then?

r? @Urgau

Urgau · 2026-07-16T21:49:30Z

I haven't looked at the implementation, but it seems a bit weird to me to have an flag called --show-coverage that doesn't show anything when used with -o. Are we worried about confusing users?

#158929 suggests updating the documentation instead.
cc @aDotInTheVoid (in case you have an opinion)

GuillaumeGomez · 2026-07-17T08:39:07Z

I haven't looked at the implementation, but it seems a bit weird to me to have an flag called --show-coverage that doesn't show anything when used with -o. Are we worried about confusing users?

#158929 suggests updating the documentation instead. cc @aDotInTheVoid (in case you have an opinion)

If you want to generate the output in a file, that seems kinda logical to not have output on stdout.

Urgau · 2026-07-17T20:41:12Z

If you want to generate the output in a file, that seems kinda logical to not have output on stdout.

100% agree, but the CLI option is called --show-..., that implies (at least to me) -o - (i.e. the current behavior). Maybe we should have --coverage?

Is there a way to know if some users are currently relying on the current behavior? (since this is a breaking change)

GuillaumeGomez · 2026-07-17T23:10:51Z

docs.rs. We could rename the option, I don't mind. But something like --doc-coverage seems better than just coverage, no?

Urgau · 2026-07-20T16:51:42Z

Yeah, --doc-coverage seems fine. I'm mostly worried about the breaking change to --show-coverage, so if -o is respected only for this new option, that seems fine to me.

GuillaumeGomez · 2026-07-21T12:49:42Z

It's a nightly only option, so breaking changes are fine. Although in this case, as long as you don't use -o, there is no change.

Urgau · 2026-07-21T16:59:10Z

Oh! I thought --show-coverage was stable, never-mind about the breaking change then.

Though I still think renaming it to --doc-coverage would be better.

GuillaumeGomez · 2026-07-21T20:44:35Z

A follow-up and an issue about doing it would be good since we'll need an FCP. ;)

Urgau · 2026-07-21T21:12:32Z

Created #159691 for the rename.

Urgau · 2026-07-21T21:12:37Z

@bors r+

rust-bors · 2026-07-21T21:12:40Z

📌 Commit 1010137 has been approved by Urgau

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@camelid

[rustdoc] Correctly handle output options with --show-coverage Fixes rust-lang#158929. The `-o` option was ignored with `--show-coverage`. This PR takes it into account and makes it closer to how these options are handled in the rest of rustdoc. Considering `calculate_doc_coverage` was never really a pass and that I needed `RenderOptions` (for the `-o` option), I moved it out of passes. r? @camelid

@camelid

[rustdoc] Correctly handle output options with --show-coverage Fixes rust-lang#158929. The `-o` option was ignored with `--show-coverage`. This PR takes it into account and makes it closer to how these options are handled in the rest of rustdoc. Considering `calculate_doc_coverage` was never really a pass and that I needed `RenderOptions` (for the `-o` option), I moved it out of passes. r? @camelid

Rollup of 12 pull requests Successful merges: - #159582 (Sync from portable simd 2026 07 20) - #158890 (Fix splat v0 mangling) - #159411 ([rustdoc] Correctly handle output options with --show-coverage) - #159647 (Remove `early_exit` closures) - #159656 (define a `Simd` type in `minicore`) - #156474 (Add paths for linked associated items) - #159211 (Fix debuginfo argument when invoking LLBC linker) - #159527 (Bring runtime symbols statics on par with foreign functions) - #159625 (Refactor is_opsem_inhabited) - #159652 (Remove `cfg(not(no_global_oom_handling))` from the `Drop` impl of `UniqueArcUninit`) - #159657 (Remove the blanket `#![cfg_attr(test, allow(unused))]` from bootstrap ) - #159663 (Add layout cycle hang regression test)

jhpratt · 2026-07-22T00:20:24Z

@bors r- #159693 (comment)

error[E0463]: can't find crate for `std`
  |
  = note: the `thumbv6m-none-eabi` target may not support the standard library
  = note: `std` is required by `<unknown>` because it does not declare `#![no_std]`
  = help: consider building the standard library from source with `cargo build -Zbuild-std`

error: cannot resolve a prelude import

rust-bors · 2026-07-22T00:20:31Z

This pull request was unapproved.

This PR was contained in a rollup (#159693), which was unapproved.

View changes since this unapproval

GuillaumeGomez added 2 commits July 16, 2026 23:34

[rustdoc] Correctly handle output options with --show-coverage

74e9e5a

Add regression test for --show-coverage output

4d5cd55

rustbot assigned camelid Jul 16, 2026

rustbot assigned Urgau and unassigned camelid Jul 16, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the show-coverage branch from e124008 to f9abe70 Compare July 17, 2026 08:38

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Urgau 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 17, 2026

Add small message to say where the output was generated

1010137

GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the show-coverage branch from f9abe70 to 1010137 Compare July 19, 2026 20:44

Urgau mentioned this pull request Jul 21, 2026

rustdoc --show-coverage is miss named #159691

Open

rust-bors Bot 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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jul 21, 2026

GuillaumeGomez mentioned this pull request Jul 21, 2026

Rollup of 11 pull requests #159692

Closed

GuillaumeGomez mentioned this pull request Jul 21, 2026

Rollup of 12 pull requests #159693

Closed

rust-bors Bot 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-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Jul 22, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

Urgau commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jul 17, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

Urgau commented Jul 17, 2026

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jul 17, 2026

Uh oh!

Urgau commented Jul 20, 2026

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jul 21, 2026

Uh oh!

Urgau commented Jul 21, 2026

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jul 21, 2026

Uh oh!

Urgau commented Jul 21, 2026

Uh oh!

Urgau commented Jul 21, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Jul 21, 2026

Uh oh!

jhpratt commented Jul 22, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Jul 22, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants