I have a few Q's:
- [x] Should I write more tests, if so, what precisely should I test for?
- [x] I have an inline question on line 65, can someone provide guidance? :)
- [x] I can implement this for `ast::TupleField` too. But should it be a separate assist fn, or should I try and jam both into the `generate_deref`?
- [x] I want to follow this up with an assist on `impl $0Deref for T {` which would automatically generate a `DerefMut` impl that mirrors the Deref as well, however, I could probably use some pointers on how to do that, since I'll have to reach into the ast of `fn deref` to grab the field that it's referencing for the `DerefMut` impl.
8569: Support inherent impls in unnamed consts r=jonas-schievink a=jonas-schievink
It turns out that some proc. macros not only generate *trait* impls wrapped in `const _: () = { ... };`, but inherent impls too. Even though it is questionable whether *custom derives* should produce non-trait impls, this is useful for procedural attribute macros once we support them.
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonasschievink@gmail.com>
8560: Escape characters in doc comments in macros correctly r=jonas-schievink a=ChayimFriedman2
Previously they were escaped twice, both by `.escape_default()` and the debug view of strings (`{:?}`). This leads to things like newlines or tabs in documentation comments being `\\n`, but we unescape literals only once, ending up with `\n`.
This was hard to spot because CMark unescaped them (at least for `'` and `"`), but it did not do so in code blocks.
This also was the root cause of #7781. This issue was solved by using `.escape_debug()` instead of `.escape_default()`, but the real issue remained.
We can bring the `.escape_default()` back by now, however I didn't do it because it is probably slower than `.escape_debug()` (more work to do), and also in order to change the code the least.
Example (the keyword and primitive docs are `include!()`d at https://doc.rust-lang.org/src/std/lib.rs.html#570-578, and thus originate from macro):
Escape characters in doc comments in macros correctly
Previously they were escaped twice, both by `.escape_default()` and the debug view of strings (`{:?}`). This leads to things like newlines or tabs in documentation comments being `\\n`, but we unescape literals only once, ending up with `\n`.
This was hard to spot because CMark unescaped them (at least for `'` and `"`), but it did not do so in code blocks.
This also was the root cause of #7781. This issue was solved by using `.escape_debug()` instead of `.escape_default()`, but the real issue remained.
We can bring the `.escape_default()` back by now, however I didn't do it because it is probably slower than `.escape_debug()` (more work to do), and also in order to change the code the least.
8557: Add an error message to fixture errors r=Veykril a=yoshuawuyts
Improve the error message when folks forget to add an `$0` in one of the fixtures. Figuring this one out was 20 minutes down the drain for me, so figured I might as well make sure nobody else has to go through the same thing in the future. Thanks!
I've went with a separate method approach, since the [highlighted code](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/8520#issuecomment-819856337) has not`Type` and uses `Ty` to get his data, but the code I had to change has no access to `Ty` and has `Type` only.
8510: Move cursor position when using item movers r=jonas-schievink a=jonas-schievink
This updates the cursor position when moving items around to stay in the same location within the moved node.
I changed the `moveItem` response to `SnippetTextEdit[]`, since that made more sense to me (the file was ignored by the client anyways, since the edits always apply to the current document). It also matches `onEnter`, which seems logical to me, but please let me know if this doesn't make sense.
There's still a bug in the client-side snippet code that will cause the cursor position to be slightly off when moving parameters in the same line (presumably we don't track the column correctly after deleting `$0`). Not really sure how to fix that immediately, but this PR should already be an improvement despite that bug.
8533: Fix typo in style guide r=jonas-schievink a=jonas-schievink
Fixes bold text rendering
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonasschievink@gmail.com>
8526: fix: Do not show flyimports in trait or impl declarations r=SomeoneToIgnore a=SomeoneToIgnore
Part of https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/8518
Removes autoimport suggestions for the case:
> inside trait definitions / impls (trait Trait {$0} / impl Foo {$0}), nothing except the fn, type and const keywords (and the full item completions for trait impls) should appear (currently many types and autoimport suggestions)
`db.trait_solve` reliably produces the same timings for the same input in the same place for me, despite supposedly being cached by Salsa.
In my perception, this is a bit odd, so I've decided to stop at this point and discuss it with people with better knowledge on the topic.
Fix #8417. Also makes it less noisy about no_mangle annotated stuff the
user can do nothing about.
Note: this still is broken with bitfield! macros. A repro in an ignore
test is included here. I believe this bug is elsewhere, and I don't
think I can work around it here.
I would like help filing the remaining bug, as it does actually affect
users, but I don't know how to describe the behaviour (or even if it
is unintended).
8415: Fix faulty assertion when extracting function with macro call r=matklad a=brandondong
**Reproduction:**
```rust
fn main() {
let n = 1;
let k = n * n;
dbg!(n);
}
```
1. Select the second and third lines of the main function. Use the "Extract into function" code assist.
2. Panic occurs in debug, error is logged in release: "[ERROR ide_assists::handlers::extract_function] assertion failed: matches!(path, ast :: Expr :: PathExpr(_))".
3. Function generates successfully on release where the panic was bypassed.
```rust
fn fun_name(n: i32) {
let k = n * n;
dbg!(n);
}
```
**Cause:**
- The generated function will take `n` as a parameter. The extraction logic needs to search the usages of `n` to determine whether it is used mutably or not. The helper `path_element_of_reference` is called for each usage but the second usage is a macro call and fails the `Expr::PathExpr(_)` match assertion.
- The caller of `path_element_of_reference` does implicitly assume it to be a `Expr::PathExpr(_)` in how it looks at its parent node for determining whether it is used mutably. This logic will not work for macros.
- I'm not sure if there are any other cases besides macros where it could be something other than a `Expr::PathExpr(_)`. I tried various examples and could not find any.
**Fix:**
- Update assertion to include the macro case.
- Add a FIXME to properly handle checking if a macro usage requires mutable access. For now, return false instead of running the existing logic that is tailored for `Expr::PathExpr(_)`'s.
fix: don't spam repeated error messages when `cargo check` fails
Conceptually, using a *message* here is wrong, because this is a
"status", rather than "point in time" thing. But statuses are an LSP
extension, while messages are stable. As a compromise, send message only
for more critical `metadata` failures, and only once per state change.
8436: Fix extract function's mutability of variables outliving the body r=matklad a=brandondong
**Reproduction:**
```rust
fn main() {
let mut k = 1;
let mut j = 2;
j += 1;
k += j;
}
```
1. Select the first to third lines of the main function. Use the "Extract into function" code assist.
2. The output is the following which does not compile because the outlived variable `k` is declared as immutable:
```rust
fn main() {
let (k, j) = fun_name();
k += j;
}
fn fun_name() -> (i32, i32) {
let mut k = 1;
let mut j = 2;
j += 1;
(k, j)
}
```
3. We would instead expect the output to be:
```rust
fn main() {
let (mut k, j) = fun_name();
k += j;
}
```
**Fix:**
- Instead of declaring outlived variables as immutable unconditionally, check for any mutable usages outside of the extracted function.
8460: Revert "Rewrite `#[derive]` removal code to be based on AST" r=jonas-schievink a=jonas-schievink
It breaks some function-like proc macros: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/185405-t-compiler.2Frust-analyzer/topic/Proc.20macro.20expansion/near/233971916
It also uses attribute indices incorrectly, which causes insufficient attributes to be removed.
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonasschievink@gmail.com>
projects / rust.git / log