The idea behind requiring the label is a noble one, but we are not
really using it consistently anyway, and it should be easy to retrofit
later, should we need it.
This also changes our handiling of snippet edits on the client side.
`editor.insertSnippet` unfortunately forces indentation, which we
really don't want to have to deal with. So, let's just implement our
manual hacky way of dealing with a simple subset of snippets we
actually use in rust-analyzer
4472: Fix path resolution for module and function with same name r=hasali19 a=hasali19
This fixes#3970 and also fixes completion for the same issue.
Co-authored-by: Hasan Ali <git@hasali.co.uk>
4423: add tests module snippet r=bnjjj a=bnjjj
Request from a friend coming from intellij Rust
Co-authored-by: Benjamin Coenen <5719034+bnjjj@users.noreply.github.com>
4397: Textmate cooperation r=matklad a=georgewfraser
This PR tweaks the fallback TextMate scopes to make them more consistent with the existing grammar and other languages, and edits the builtin TextMate grammar to align with semantic coloring. Before is on the left, after is on the right:
<img width="855" alt="Screen Shot 2020-05-10 at 1 45 51 PM" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1369240/81512320-a8be7e80-92d4-11ea-8940-2c03f6769015.png">
**Use keyword.other for regular keywords instead of keyword**. This is a really peculiar quirk of TextMate conventions, but virtually *all* TextMate grammars use `keyword.other` (colored blue in VSCode Dark+) for regular keywords and `keyword.control` (colored purple in VSCode Dark+) for control keywords. The TextMate scope `keyword` is colored like control keywords, not regular keywords. It may seem strange that the `keyword` scope is not the right fallback for the `keyword` semantic token, but TextMate has a long and weird history. Note how keywords change from purple back to blue (what they were before semantic coloring was added):
**(1) Use punctuation.section.embedded for format specifiers**. This aligns with how Typescript colors formatting directives:
<img width="238" alt="Screen Shot 2020-05-09 at 10 54 01 AM" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1369240/81481258-93b5f280-91e3-11ea-99c2-c6d258c5bcad.png">
**(2) Consistently use `entity.name.type.*` scopes for type names**. Avoid using `entity.name.*` which gets colored like a keyword.
**(3) Use Property instead of Member for fields**. Property and Member are very similar, but if you look at the TextMate fallback scopes, it's clear that Member is intended for function-like-things (methods?) and Property is intended for variable-like-things.
**(4) Color `for` as a regular keyword when it's part of `impl Trait for Struct`**.
**(5) Use `variable.other.constant` for constants instead of `entity.name.constant`**. In the latest VSCode insiders, variable.other.constant has a subtly different color that differentiates constants from ordinary variables. It looks close to the green of types but it's not the same---it's a new color recently added to take advantage of semantic coloring.
I also made some minor changes that make the TextMate scopes better match the semantic scopes. The effect of this for the user is you observe less of a change when semantic coloring "activates". You can see the changes I made relative to the built-in TextMate grammar here:
a91d15c80c..97428b6d52 (diff-6966c729b862f79f79bf7258eb3e0885)
Co-authored-by: George Fraser <george@fivetran.com>
4421: Find references to a function outside module r=flodiebold a=montekki
Fixes#4188
Yet again, it looks like although the code in
da1f316b02/crates/ra_ide_db/src/search.rs (L128-L132)
may be wrong, it is not hit since the `vis` is `None` at this point. The fix is similar to the #4237 case: just add another special case to `Definition::visibility()`.
Co-authored-by: Fedor Sakharov <fedor.sakharov@gmail.com>
4394: Simplify r=matklad a=Veetaha
4414: Highlighting improvements r=matklad a=matthewjasper
- `static mut`s are highlighted as `mutable`.
- The name of the macro declared by `macro_rules!` is now highlighted.
Co-authored-by: veetaha <veetaha2@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Matthew Jasper <mjjasper1@gmail.com>
4346: Fix rename of enum variant visible from module r=matklad a=montekki
Probably fixes#4237
It looks like the ref is found correctly in this case but it's visibility is not correctly determined. I took a stab at fixing that by adding an implementation of `HasVisibility` for `EnumVariant` so it works more or less the same way it does for struct fields.
In other words, the `search_range` here does not contain the ref since it's not considered visible:
efd8e34c39/crates/ra_ide_db/src/search.rs (L209-L214)
Before that I tried to populate `ItemScope` with visible enum variants but that ended up with breaking tests all over the place and also it looked illogical in the end: `ItemScope` is not populated with, say, public struct fields and the same should be true for `enum` variants.
I've added two more or less identical tests: one for the case with a struct field rename and one for enum variant rename; the test for struct should probably be removed and the names should be changed.
Co-authored-by: Fedor Sakharov <fedor.sakharov@gmail.com>
