fix: Tracing span names should match function names
When viewing traces, it's slightly confusing when the span name doesn't match the function name. Ensure the names are consistent.
(It might be worth moving most of these to use `#[tracing::instrument]` so the name can never go stale. `@davidbarsky` suggested that is marginally slower, so I've just done the simple change here.)
When viewing traces, it's slightly confusing when the span name doesn't
match the function name. Ensure the names are consistent.
(It might be worth moving most of these to use #[tracing::instrument]
so the name can never go stale. @davidbarsky suggested that is marginally
slower, so I've just done the simple change here.)
feature: Make generate function assist generate a function as a constructor if the generated function has the name "new" and is an asscociated function.
close#17050
This PR makes `generate function assist` generate a function as a constructor if the generated function has the name "new" and is an asscociated function.
If the asscociate type is a record struct, it generates the constructor like this.
```rust
impl Foo {
fn new() -> Self {
Self { field_1: todo!(), field_2: todo!() }
}
}
```
If the asscociate type is a tuple struct, it generates the constructor like this.
```rust
impl Foo {
fn new() -> Self {
Self(todo!(), todo!())
}
}
```
If the asscociate type is a unit struct, it generates the constructor like this.
```rust
impl Foo {
fn new() -> Self {
Self
}
}
```
If the asscociate type is another adt, it generates the constructor like this.
```rust
impl Foo {
fn new() -> Self {
todo!()
}
}
```
Support hovering limits for adts
Fix#17009
1. Currently, r-a supports limiting the number of struct fields displayed when hovering. This PR extends it to support enum variants and union fields. Since the display of these three (ADTs) is similar, this PR extends 'hover_show_structFields' to 'hover_show_adtFieldsOrVariants'.
2. This PR also resolved the problem that the layout of ADT was not restricted by display limitations when hovering on the Self type.
3. Additionally, this PR changes the default value of display limitations to `10` (instead of the original `null`), which helps users discover this feature.
Make `cargo run` always available for binaries
Previously, items for `cargo test` and `cargo check` would appear as in
the `Select Runnable` quick pick that appears when running
`rust-analyzer: Run`, but `run` would only appear as a runnable if a
`main`` function was selected in the editor. This change adds `cargo
run` as an always available runnable command for binary packages.
This makes it easier to develop cli / tui applications, as now users can
run application from anywhere in their codebase.
chore: add some `tracing` to project loading
I wanted to see what's happening during project loading and if it could be parallelized. I'm thinking maybe, but it's not this PR :)
Try to generate more meaningful names in json converter
I just found out about rust-analyzer json converter, but I think it would be more convenient, if names were more useful, like using the names of the keys.
Let's look at some realistic arbitrary json:
```json
{
"user": {
"address": {
"street": "Main St",
"house": 3
},
"email": "example@example.com"
}
}
```
I think, new generated code is much easier to read and to edit, than the old:
```rust
// Old
struct Struct1{ house: i64, street: String }
struct Struct2{ address: Struct1, email: String }
struct Struct3{ user: Struct2 }
// New
struct Address1{ house: i64, street: String }
struct User1{ address: Address1, email: String }
struct Root1{ user: User1 }
```
Ideally, if we drop the numbers, I can see it being usable just as is (may be rename root)
```rust
struct Address{ house: i64, street: String }
struct User{ address: Address, email: String }
struct Root{ user: User }
```
Sadly, we can't just drop them, because there can be multiple fields (recursive) with the same name, and we can't just easily retroactively add numbers if the name has 2 instances due to parsing being single pass.
We could ignore the `1` and add number only if it's > 1, but I will leave this open to discussion and right now made it the simpler way
In sum, even with numbers, I think this PR still helps in readability
