Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

zeroize: Fix docs #709

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 13, 2022
Merged

zeroize: Fix docs #709

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 13, 2022

Conversation

aewag
Copy link
Contributor

@aewag aewag commented Jan 13, 2022

I've experimented with zeroize v1.5.0-pre and just stumbled upon some minor doc typos.

@aewag aewag changed the title Fix docs zeroize: Fix docs Jan 13, 2022
@aewag aewag marked this pull request as draft January 13, 2022 15:41
@aewag aewag marked this pull request as ready for review January 13, 2022 15:45
@tarcieri tarcieri merged commit dcb5ed9 into RustCrypto:master Jan 13, 2022
@tarcieri
Copy link
Member

Thanks! Curious why these weren't caught by doctests...

@aewag
Copy link
Contributor Author

aewag commented Jan 13, 2022

Yeah, I also didn't see initially why this wasn't caught. Tests were executed so I assumed that's fine.

Just double checked and found the issue: The naming of the feature is zeroize_derive not derive. Thus, the scope was never enabled. I just tested it on my fork:

By only fixing the feature naming:
aewag@f2bab38
The doctests fail as expected:
https://github.com/aewag/utils/runs/4806210245?check_suite_focus=true

Just created a 2nd PR that sits on top of the current master with these fixes applied. This ran successfully the tests on my machine
#710

@aewag aewag deleted the zeroize-fix-docs branch January 13, 2022 16:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants