Consider these expples
{ 92 }
async { 92 }
'a: { 92 }
#[a] { 92 }
Previously the tree for them were
BLOCK_EXPR
{ ... }
EFFECT_EXPR
async
BLOCK_EXPR
{ ... }
EFFECT_EXPR
'a:
BLOCK_EXPR
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
#[a]
{ ... }
As you see, it gets progressively worse :) The last two items are
especially odd. The last one even violates the balanced curleys
invariant we have (#10357) The new approach is to say that the stuff in
`{}` is stmt_list, and the block is stmt_list + optional modifiers
BLOCK_EXPR
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
async
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
'a:
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
#[a]
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
There's a tension between keeping a well-architectured minimal
orthogonal set of constructs, and providing convenience functions.
Relieve this pressure by introducing an dedicated module for
non-orthogonal shortcuts.
This is inspired by the django.shortcuts module which serves a similar
purpose architecturally.
8415: Fix faulty assertion when extracting function with macro call r=matklad a=brandondong
**Reproduction:**
```rust
fn main() {
let n = 1;
let k = n * n;
dbg!(n);
}
```
1. Select the second and third lines of the main function. Use the "Extract into function" code assist.
2. Panic occurs in debug, error is logged in release: "[ERROR ide_assists::handlers::extract_function] assertion failed: matches!(path, ast :: Expr :: PathExpr(_))".
3. Function generates successfully on release where the panic was bypassed.
```rust
fn fun_name(n: i32) {
let k = n * n;
dbg!(n);
}
```
**Cause:**
- The generated function will take `n` as a parameter. The extraction logic needs to search the usages of `n` to determine whether it is used mutably or not. The helper `path_element_of_reference` is called for each usage but the second usage is a macro call and fails the `Expr::PathExpr(_)` match assertion.
- The caller of `path_element_of_reference` does implicitly assume it to be a `Expr::PathExpr(_)` in how it looks at its parent node for determining whether it is used mutably. This logic will not work for macros.
- I'm not sure if there are any other cases besides macros where it could be something other than a `Expr::PathExpr(_)`. I tried various examples and could not find any.
**Fix:**
- Update assertion to include the macro case.
- Add a FIXME to properly handle checking if a macro usage requires mutable access. For now, return false instead of running the existing logic that is tailored for `Expr::PathExpr(_)`'s.
Co-authored-by: Brandon <brandondong604@hotmail.com>
