this was not a great sentence even before your change.

some background:

1. bootstrap allows abbreviating Step paths named x/y/z as z. if there are multiple paths that end with z, it effectively picks a random path (it’s deterministic, but not predictable without reading the code).

this sentence is using rustdoc in a way that makes it look like it refers to x test tests/ui/rustdoc. i am not convinced that is even the suite path that runs when you say x test rustdoc, and i have no idea what x test rustc does, maybe unit tests for rustc-main (i.e. effectively a no-op).

i think the intent is actually to refer to the CLI tools themselves, not the paths passed to bootstrap, but that’s very unclear from context.

2. tests/ui/rustdoc is running rustc, not rustdoc. tests/ui/rustdoc/README.md says this clearly IMO:

This directory is for tests that have to do with rustdoc, but test the behavior
of rustc. For example, rustc should not warn that an attribute rustdoc uses is
unknown.

i would suggest something like this:

I guess I wrote these sentences and they're indeed quite poorly worded, oh my! I must've written them with a tired brain powering through the endless iterations of PR #2298 I simply wanted to have merged and be done with :'D

This isn't meant to refer to specific compiletest test suites, with "lints that are run as part of $program" I was trying to express the fact that some lints are [emitted] / some lint [impls and/or passes] are run by both the binaries, rustc and rustdoc and we want to ensure that they (i.e., a specific subset of lints) are not only emitted / run when executing rustdoc but also when executing rustc.

Not sure how to rephrase this, but it's not (all) lints, it's only some lints. There are lints that are only emitted by rustdoc, not rustc, like the ones prefixed with rustdoc::.

maybe "certain" lints?