The primary advantage of ungrammar is that it (eventually) allows one
to describe concrete syntax tree structure -- with alternatives and
specific sequence of tokens & nodes.
That should be re-usable for:
* generate `make` calls
* Rust reference
* Hypothetical parser's evented API
We loose doc comments for the time being unfortunately. I don't think
we should add support for doc comments to ungrammar -- they'll make
grammar file hard to read. We might supply docs as out-of band info,
or maybe just via a reference, but we'll think about that once things
are no longer in flux
5564: SSR: Restrict to current selection if any r=davidlattimore a=davidlattimore
The selection is also used to avoid unnecessary work, but only to the file level. Further restricting unnecessary work is left for later.
Co-authored-by: David Lattimore <dml@google.com>
5565: SSR: Don't mix non-path-based rules with path-based r=matklad a=davidlattimore
If any rules contain paths, then we reject any rules that don't contain paths. Allowing a mix leads to strange semantics, since the path-based rules only match things where the path refers to semantically the same thing, whereas the non-path-based rules could match anything. Specifically, if we have a rule like `foo ==>> bar` we only want to match the `foo` that is in the current scope, not any `foo`. However "foo" can be parsed as a pattern (BIND_PAT -> NAME -> IDENT). Allowing such a rule through would result in renaming everything called `foo` to `bar`. It'd also be slow, since without a path, we'd have to use the slow-scan search mechanism.
Co-authored-by: David Lattimore <dml@google.com>
If any rules contain paths, then we reject any rules that don't contain paths. Allowing a mix leads to strange semantics, since the path-based rules only match things where the path refers to semantically the same thing, whereas the non-path-based rules could match anything. Specifically, if we have a rule like `foo ==>> bar` we only want to match the `foo` that is in the current scope, not any `foo`. However "foo" can be parsed as a pattern (BIND_PAT -> NAME -> IDENT). Allowing such a rule through would result in renaming everything called `foo` to `bar`. It'd also be slow, since without a path, we'd have to use the slow-scan search mechanism.
It seems that Semantics::scope, if given a statement node, won't resolve
locals that were defined in the current scope, only in parent scopes.
Not sure if this is intended / expected behavior, but we work around it
for now by finding another nearby node to use as the scope (e.g. the
expression inside the EXPR_STMT).
5520: Add DocumentData to represent in-memory document with LSP info r=matklad a=kjeremy
At the moment this only holds document version information but in the near-future it will hold other things like semantic token delta info.
Co-authored-by: kjeremy <kjeremy@gmail.com>
5522: Increace tracing-tree version from 0.1.3 to 0.1.4 r=kjeremy a=vandenheuvel
Co-authored-by: Bram van den Heuvel <b.vandenheuvel@student.tudelft.nl>
5516: Better LSP conformance r=matklad a=vsrs
At the moment rust-analyzer does not fully conform to the LSP. This PR fixes two LSP related issues:
1) rust-analyzer sends predefined server capabilities and does not take supplied client capabilities in mind.
2) rust-analyzer uses dynamic `textDocument/didSave` registration even if the client does not support it.
Co-authored-by: vsrs <vit@conrlab.com>
5518: Use resolved paths in SSR rules r=matklad a=davidlattimore
The main user-visible changes are:
* SSR now matches paths based on whether they resolve to the same thing instead of whether they're written the same.
* So `foo()` won't match `foo()` if it's a different function `foo()`, but will match `bar::foo()` if it's the same `foo`.
* Paths in the replacement will now be rendered with appropriate qualification for their context.
* For example `foo::Bar` will render as just `Bar` inside the module `foo`, but might render as `baz::foo::Bar` from elsewhere.
* This means that all paths in the search pattern and replacement template must be able to be resolved.
* It now also matters where you invoke SSR from, since paths are resolved relative to wherever that is.
* Search now uses find-uses on paths to locate places to try matching. This means that when a path is present in the pattern, search will generally be pretty fast.
* Function calls can now match method calls again, but this time only if they resolve to the same function.
Co-authored-by: David Lattimore <dml@google.com>
This differs from how this used to work before I removed it in that:
a) It's only one direction. Function calls in the pattern can match
method calls in the code, but not the other way around.
b) We now check that the function call in the pattern resolves to the
same function as the method call in the code.
The lack of (b) was the reason I felt the need to remove the feature
before.
Previously, submatches were handled simply by searching in placeholders
for more matches. That only works if we search all nodes in the tree
recursively. In a subsequent commit, I intend to make search not always
be recursive recursive. This commit prepares for that by finding all
matches, even if they overlap, then nesting them and removing
overlapping matches.
In a later commit, paths in templates will be resolved. This allows us
to render the path with appropriate qualifiers for its context. Here we
prepare for that change by updating existing tests where I'd previously
not bothered to define the items that the template referred to.
