This renames `descend_into_macros` to `descend_into_macros_single` and `descend_into_macros_many` into `descend_into_macros`.
However, this does not touch a function in `SemanticsImpl` of same name.
e.g. if you have a trait T and `impl T for S` for some struct, if you
goto definition on some function name inside the impl, it will go to the
definition of that function inside the `trait T` block, rather than the
current behaviour of not going anywhere at all.
8245: Properly resolve intra doc links in hover and goto_definition r=matklad a=Veykril
Unfortunately involves a bit of weird workarounds due to pulldown_cmark's incorrect lifetimes on `BrokenLinkCallback`... I should probably open an issue there asking for the fixes to be pushed to a release since they already exist in the repo for quite some time it seems.
Fixes#8258, Fixes#8238
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
8267: Adding gifs and screenshots for features in manual r=matklad a=MozarellaMan
For #6539
This includes most of gif or screenshot examples of most items in the "Features" header. With the exceptions of:
- **On Typing Assists** - couldn't get it to work for a demo, I'm probably missing something?
- **Structural search and replace** - looked to be already a visual example of the feature
- **Workspace symbol** - wasn't sure how best to show this, all of the examples maybe? Also wasn't sure of the best code example to show it off
- **Semantic Syntax Highlighting** - seemed obvious enough to not need a screenshot, but I could easily add this
All the gifs/pngs are hosted in this [comment](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/6539#issuecomment-809574840). Please let me know if any of them aren't suitable (and why) and I'll improve it! Or if you don't like the theme/font
Co-authored-by: Ayomide Bamidele <48062697+MozarellaMan@users.noreply.github.com>
What happens here is that we lower `: ` to a missing expression, and
then correctly record that the corresponding field expression resolves
to a specific field. Where we fail is in the mapping of syntax to this
missing expression. Doing it via `ast_field.expr()` fails, as that
expression is `None`. Instead, we go in the opposite direcition and ask
each lowered field about its source.
This works, but has wrong complexity `O(N)` and, really, the
implementation is just too complex. We need some better management of
data here.
