feat: happy ci

Author: augustin-v

examples/supplementary/Cargo.lock

@@ -1,31 +1,40 @@
 # nonexistent_path_in_comment
 
 ### What it does
+
 This lint checks code comments, including both line comments (using `//`) and block comments
 (`/*...*/`) for file path references. It then validates that the referenced files exist either
 relative to the source file's directory or relative to the workspace root. When a file path
 reference does not point to an existing file, the lint emits a warning.
 
 ### Why is this bad?
+
 References to nonexistent files in comments can be misleading:
+
 - They clutter the code with outdated or inaccurate references.
 - They may cause confusion among developers who are trying to trace implementation details
-or documentation.
+  or documentation.
 
 ### Known problems
+
 - This example:
+
 ```rust
 // dylint/dylint/build.rs  (it exists)
 ```
+
 would get flagged here because the workspace root is `supplementary`
 it did exist, as this lint doesn't check for project root.
 
 ### Example
+
 ```
 // See ../nonexistent/path/file.rs for implementation details
 fn main() {}
 ```
+
 Use instead:
+
 ```
 // See ../actual/path/file.rs for implementation details
 fn main() {}

examples/supplementary/nonexistent_path_in_comment/README.md

@@ -13,31 +13,40 @@ use rustc_span::{BytePos, FileName, Span, SyntaxContext};
 
 dylint_linting::declare_late_lint! {
     /// ### What it does
+    ///
     /// This lint checks code comments, including both line comments (using `//`) and block comments
     /// (`/*...*/`) for file path references. It then validates that the referenced files exist either
     /// relative to the source file's directory or relative to the workspace root. When a file path
     /// reference does not point to an existing file, the lint emits a warning.
     ///
     /// ### Why is this bad?
+    ///
     /// References to nonexistent files in comments can be misleading:
+    ///
     /// - They clutter the code with outdated or inaccurate references.
     /// - They may cause confusion among developers who are trying to trace implementation details
-    /// or documentation.
+    ///   or documentation.
     ///
     /// ### Known problems
+    ///
     /// - This example:
+    ///
     /// ```rust
     /// // dylint/dylint/build.rs  (it exists)
     /// ```
+    ///
     /// would get flagged here because the workspace root is `supplementary`
     /// it did exist, as this lint doesn't check for project root.
     ///
     /// ### Example
+    ///
     /// ```
     /// // See ../nonexistent/path/file.rs for implementation details
     /// fn main() {}
     /// ```
+    ///
     /// Use instead:
+    ///
     /// ```
     /// // See ../actual/path/file.rs for implementation details
     /// fn main() {}

examples/supplementary/nonexistent_path_in_comment/src/lib.rs

@@ -1,2 +1 @@
 # clippy
-

examples/testing/clippy/README.md

@@ -5,13 +5,17 @@
 ### Why is this bad?
 
 ### Known problems
+
 Remove if none.
 
 ### Example
+
 ```rust
 // example code where a warning is issued
 ```
+
 Use instead:
+
 ```rust
 // example code that does not raise a warning
 ```