add sort_unstable to unstable book

[steveklabnik]

cc #40585

[rust-highfive]

r? @frewsxcv

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[frewsxcv]

A bit of a pipe dream, but it'd be cool if we had some sort of lint to make sure all unstable features are in the unstable book

@bors r+ rollup

[bors]

📌 Commit 3d01e1a has been approved by frewsxcv

[alexcrichton]

Oh are we gonna track all unstable library features as well? We may be missing quite a few of those...

(I also figured that unstable library features would just have API docs)

[frewsxcv]

Oh are we gonna track all unstable library features as well?

I'm in favor of adding entries of all unstable things into the unstable book, though I don't feel strongly. For unstable library features, the body of that particular page (e.g. the one in the pull request) could link just directly to the API docs.

[steveklabnik]

Ah yeah, I forgot about the library vs non-library distinction here. Basically, same as Corey; I don't feel super strongly about it, but it is kinda nice to be able to browse _all_ unstable features.

…

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Corey Farwell ***@***.***> wrote: Oh are we gonna track all unstable library features as well? I'm in favor of adding entries of all unstable things into the unstable book, though I don't feel strongly. For unstable library features, the body of that particular page (e.g. the one in the pull request) could link just directly to the API docs. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#40586 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABsislRFxJBiNIEgjqC9M1ocAxpuUY2ks5rmbBDgaJpZM4Mf7Ch> .