Miss Dada  🏳️‍⚧️

how do you define what is "essential stuff", without human input by the author of the crate? what happens when they don't provide that definition? the purpose of a given page of docs is to show everything you can do with a thing, even if that turns out to be a lot

like, i get it, there's a lot going on, and we've taken strides to streamline this by auto-folding things like trait impls and type definitions but like, my personal opinion is that rustdoc should show you everything that can be known about a type

There are a few that I think should be excluded here across the board (as in purely special cased, no hooks) In particular the impls that apply to *every* type (from, into, any at least)

Can you say more as to why? Users (especially new ones) still need to know they're available

They apply to all types. We should have a "here are the impls that apply for all types" Repeating them on each type is more noise than it's worth imo

Thinking about how that would work in practice. User goes to i32 or vector, and looks at the methods it provides. Are you saying don't show the common methods in the list but rather on a separate page?

I'm saying that showing that you can do `let x: i32 = 1i32.into()` is not useful

I was asking about where the knowledge of being able to do .into() on the given type should live in the docs. Sounds like you were commenting on something else?