This pull request add tooltips to most links of sidebar.
The tooltips display "summary line" of items' document.
Some lengthy/annoying raw markdown code are eliminated, such as links and headers.
- `[Rust](http://rust-lang.org)` displays as `Rust` (no URLs)
- `# header` displays as `header` (no `#`s)
Some inline spans, e.g. ``` `code` ``` and ```*emphasis*```, are kept as they are, for better readable.
I've make sure `&` `'` `"` `<` and `>` are properly displayed in tooltips, for example, `&'a Option<T>`.
Online preview: http://liigo.com/tmp/tooltips/std/index.html
@alexcrichton @steveklabnik since you have reviewed my previous ([v1](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/13014),[v2](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/16448)) PRs of this serise, which have been closed for technical reasons. Thank you.
Lifetime elision documentation was reference a previously existing function
that doesn't exist. After talking with Steve Klabnik, I confirmed the correct
function to be referenced and updated documentation accordingly.
When I wrote this code, my janky shim to verify the constants didn't
work as intended.
This fixes everything I've run into since merge, which is hopefully
everything.
Make compiletest set an environment variable so that on Windows 32-bit test executables containing certain substrings (e.g. 'install', 'setup', 'update', 'patch') are not blocked by UAC's Installer Detection Technology.
This should fix issue #20797 (but I don't want to close it automatically).
As the actual fix is very small this would be a perfect candidate for a rollup.
Compiling won't produce an executable just yet because (as stated in the next
paragraph) there are errors. By removing this sentance, the reader won't get
confused when they expect a successful compile i.e. if they don't read ahead one
paragraph, they are going to be checking their code and wondering why it's not
compiling.
Previous wording wasn’t clear about its actual behaviour. It could be
interpreted as answering either:
* Can current thread panic?
* Is current thread unwinding because of panic?
r? @steveklabnik
Not sure on what *exactly* should be said here, but I think this is the most important bit. This PR also establishes conventions for describing performance minimally.
I suggest to describe preformance for individual methods we use a `# Performance` heading. Not sure if we should have
```
# Performance: O(1)
details details
```
or
```
# Performance:
O(1)
details details
```
Since I think most methods don't need discussion, the former seems more resonable. But it's kind of weird to have info "in" the heading.
r? @steveklabnik
When I wrote this code, my janky shim to verify the constants didn't
work as intended.
This fixes everything I've run into since merge, which is hopefully
everything.
