I don't like our macro tests -- they are brittle and don't inspire
confidence. I think the reason for that is that we try to unit-test
them, but that is at odds with reality, where macro expansion
fundamentally depends on name resolution.
10467: Optimize CodeLens for references/impls r=Veykril a=ericsampson
Don't do unnecessary work.
Followup to #10447 . cc `@Veykril`
Co-authored-by: Eric Sampson <esampson@eaze.com>
10478: minor: Update Cargo.lock r=Veykril a=Veykril
This causes CI to fail for some reason I think
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
10440: Fix Clippy warnings and replace some `if let`s with `match` r=Veykril a=arzg
I decided to try fixing a bunch of Clippy warnings. I am aware of this project’s opinion of Clippy (I have read both [rust-lang/clippy#5537](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/5537) and [rust-analyzer/rowan#57 (comment)](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rowan/pull/57#discussion_r415676159)), so I totally understand if part of or the entirety of this PR is rejected. In particular, I can see how the semicolons and `if let` vs `match` commits provide comparatively little benefit when compared to the ensuing churn.
I tried to separate each kind of change into its own commit to make it easier to discard certain changes. I also only applied Clippy suggestions where I thought they provided a definite improvement to the code (apart from semicolons, which is IMO more of a formatting/consistency question than a linting question). In the end I accumulated a list of 28 Clippy lints I ignored entirely.
Sidenote: I should really have asked about this on Zulip before going through all 1,555 `if let`s in the codebase to decide which ones definitely look better as `match` :P
Co-authored-by: Aramis Razzaghipour <aramisnoah@gmail.com>
10456: fix: Avoid cycle when lowering predicates for associated item lookup r=flodiebold a=jonas-schievink
Fixes https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/10386
(the salsa bug persists, but this lets us avoid it by fixing the underlying bug)
This reimplements the rustc logic in b27661eb33/compiler/rustc_typeck/src/collect.rs (L556): When resolving an associated type `T::Item`, we've previously lowered all predicates that could affect `T`, but we actually have to look only at those predicates whose traits define an associated type of the right name.
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonasschievink@gmail.com>
