Improve check-cfg Cargo macro diagnostic with crate name
This commit is contained in:
parent
e3e5bd95cd
commit
291c519c69
5 changed files with 19 additions and 14 deletions
|
@ -806,7 +806,7 @@ lint_unexpected_cfg_add_build_rs_println = or consider adding `{$build_rs_printl
|
|||
lint_unexpected_cfg_add_cargo_feature = consider using a Cargo feature instead
|
||||
lint_unexpected_cfg_add_cargo_toml_lint_cfg = or consider adding in `Cargo.toml` the `check-cfg` lint config for the lint:{$cargo_toml_lint_cfg}
|
||||
lint_unexpected_cfg_add_cmdline_arg = to expect this configuration use `{$cmdline_arg}`
|
||||
lint_unexpected_cfg_cargo_update = the {$macro_kind} `{$macro_name}` may come from an old version of it's defining crate, try updating your dependencies with `cargo update`
|
||||
lint_unexpected_cfg_cargo_update = the {$macro_kind} `{$macro_name}` may come from an old version of the `{$crate_name}` crate, try updating your dependency with `cargo update -p {$crate_name}`
|
||||
|
||||
lint_unexpected_cfg_define_features = consider defining some features in `Cargo.toml`
|
||||
lint_unexpected_cfg_doc_cargo = see <https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/rustc/check-cfg/cargo-specifics.html> for more information about checking conditional configuration
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue