Commit graph

919 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Edwin Cheng
f90fbaf6a6 Add documents owner for ImplDef and SourceFile 2020-05-03 18:00:27 +08:00
Kirill Bulatov
c4b32d1534 Fix the extension method 2020-05-02 21:41:02 +03:00
bors[bot]
89e1f97515
Merge #4207 #4253
4207: Add unwrap block assist #4156 r=matklad a=bnjjj

close issue #4156 

4253: Remove `workspaceLoaded` setting r=matklad a=eminence

The `workspaceLoaded` notification setting was originally designed to
control the display of a popup message that said:

    "workspace loaded, {} rust packages"

This popup was removed and replaced by a much sleeker message in the
VSCode status bar that provides a real-time status while loading:

    rust-analyzer: {}/{} packages

This was done as part of #3587

The change in this PR simply renames this setting from `workspaceLoaded` to
`progress` to better describe what it actually controls.  At the moment,
the only type of progress message that is controlled by this setting is
the initial load messages, but in theory other messages could also be
controlled by this setting.


Reviewer notes:

* If we didn't like the idea of causing minor breaking to user's config, we could keep the setting name as `workspaceLoaded`
* I think we can now close both #2719 and #3176 since the notification dialog in question no longer exists (actually I think you can close those issues even if you reject this PR 😄 )

Co-authored-by: Benjamin Coenen <5719034+bnjjj@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Chin <achin@eminence32.net>
2020-05-02 12:44:55 +00:00
Aleksey Kladov
359d3be308 Fix parsing of blocks without { 2020-05-02 14:35:17 +02:00
Benjamin Coenen
fdf86637bf Merge branch 'master' of github.com:rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer 2020-05-02 13:39:05 +02:00
bors[bot]
fb8fb65131
Merge #4234
4234: Support local_inner_macros r=jonas-schievink a=edwin0cheng

This PR implements `#[macro_export(local_inner_macros)]` support. 

Note that the rustc implementation is quite [hacky][1] too. :)

[1]: 614f273e93/src/librustc_resolve/macros.rs (L456)

Co-authored-by: Edwin Cheng <edwin0cheng@gmail.com>
2020-05-02 10:30:49 +00:00
Benjamin Coenen
0b40876b99 Merge branch 'master' of github.com:rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer 2020-05-02 12:25:04 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
b73dbbfbf2 Add missing members generates indented blocks 2020-05-02 11:53:07 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
623faefcda Cleanup inline tests 2020-05-02 11:21:39 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
642a3392d9 Update test data 2020-05-02 11:21:39 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
4f2134cc33 Introduce EffectExpr 2020-05-02 11:21:39 +02:00
Edwin Cheng
edf0b4c152 Test whether it is bang macro properly 2020-05-02 10:16:26 +08:00
Aleksey Kladov
fd030f9450 Revert "Merge #4233"
This reverts commit a5f2b16366, reversing
changes made to c96b2180c1.
2020-05-02 01:12:37 +02:00
bors[bot]
3232fd5179
Merge #4220 #4240
4220: Introduce LowerCtx r=matklad a=edwin0cheng

This PR introduces `LowerCtx` for path lowering. 

After this PR, there are only 2 places remains for using deprecated `Path::from_ast`, which is related to `AstTransform` I am not familiar. I would like to change these in another PR by others ;)

related disscusiion:  https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/185405-t-compiler.2Fwg-rls-2.2E0/topic/Path.3A.3Afrom_src

And also fixed part of https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/4176#issuecomment-620672930

4240: Bump deps r=matklad a=lnicola



Co-authored-by: Edwin Cheng <edwin0cheng@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Laurențiu Nicola <lnicola@dend.ro>
2020-05-01 20:16:25 +00:00
bors[bot]
21588e15df
Merge #4246
4246: Validate uses of self and super r=matklad a=djrenren

This change follows on the validation of the `crate` keyword in paths. It verifies the following things:

`super`:
 - May only be preceded by other `super` segments
 - If in a `UseItem` then all semantically preceding paths also consist only of `super`

`self`
 - May only be the start of a path


Just a note, a couple times while working on this I found myself really wanting a Visitor of some sort so that I could traverse descendants while skipping sub-trees that are unimportant. Iterators don't really work for this, so as you can see I reached for recursion. Considering paths are generally small a fancy debounced visitor probably isn't important but figured I'd say something in case we had something like this lying around and I wasn't using it.

Co-authored-by: John Renner <john@jrenner.net>
2020-05-01 19:24:25 +00:00
Diana
375dd18dc0 Fix pub(self) visibility?
Clippy complained about it and it seems wrong
2020-05-01 12:09:47 -04:00
John Renner
3bb46042fb Validate uses of self and super 2020-05-01 08:59:24 -07:00
Benjamin Coenen
dc34162450 Merge branch 'master' of github.com:rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer 2020-05-01 16:26:30 +02:00
Laurențiu Nicola
1e20467c3a Bump deps 2020-05-01 15:29:03 +03:00
Aleksey Kladov
1865dedadf Introduce BlockModifier 2020-04-30 22:58:26 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
292ba6a1f8 Remove dead code, which elaborately pretends to be alive 2020-04-30 22:41:14 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
15cfa9a808 Fix a bunch of false-positives in join-lines 2020-04-30 22:08:50 +02:00
bors[bot]
745bd45ddb
Merge #4227
4227: Report invalid, nested, multi-segment crate-paths r=matklad a=djrenren

There was a bug in the previous path-validating code that didn't detect multi-segment paths that started with `crate`.

```rust
// Successfully reported
use foo::{crate};

// BUG: was not being reported
use foo::{crate::bar};
```

This was due to my confusion about path-associativity. That is, the path with no qualifier is the innermost path, not the outermost. I've updated the code with a lot of comments to explain what's going on. 

This bug was discovered when I found an erroneous `ok` test which I reported here: 
https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/4226

This test now fails and has been modified, hopefully in the spirit of the original test, to be correct.  Sorry about submitting the bug in the first place!

Co-authored-by: John Renner <john@jrenner.net>
2020-04-30 18:37:35 +00:00
John Renner
513a3615f6 Report invalid, nested, multi-segment crate-paths
Specifically, things like:

use foo::{crate::bar};

Are now being caught, when before we only caught:

use foo::{crate};
2020-04-30 11:16:09 -07:00
Edwin Cheng
45c4f620b1 Special-case try macro_rules 2020-04-30 22:07:46 +08:00
Aleksey Kladov
c51c8bfb84 Special-case try macro to better support 2015 edition 2020-04-30 14:17:14 +02:00
bors[bot]
95e8766db6
Merge #4178
4178: Validate the location of `crate` in paths r=matklad a=djrenren

**This solution does not fully handle `use` statements. See below**

This pull requests implements simple validation of usages of the `crate` keyword in `Path`s. Specifically it validates that:

- If a `PathSegment` is starts with the `crate` keyword, it is also the first segment of the `Path`
- All other usages of `crate` in `Path`s are considered errors.

This aligns with `rustc`'s rules. Unlike rustc this implementation does not issue a special error message in the case of `::crate` but it does catch the error.

Furthermore, this change does not cover all error cases. Specifically the following is not caught:

```rust
use foo::{crate}
```

This is because this check is context sensitive. From an AST perspective, `crate` is the root of the `Path`. Only by inspecting the full `UseItem` do we see that it is not in fact the root. This problem becomes worse because `UseTree`s are allowed to be arbitrarily nested:

```rust
use {crate, {{crate, foo::{crate}}}
```

So this is a hard problem to solve without essentially a breadth-first search. In a traditional compiler, I'd say this error is most easily found during the AST -> HIR conversion pass but within rust-analyzer I'm not sure where it belongs.  

Under the implementation in this PR, such errors are ignored so we're *more correct* just not *entirely correct*. 

Co-authored-by: John Renner <john@jrenner.net>
2020-04-30 10:17:40 +00:00
John Renner
0af727da91 Validate the location of crate in paths 2020-04-29 11:06:51 -07:00
Aleksey Kladov
b4dd475257 More principled approach for finding From trait 2020-04-29 14:51:44 +02:00
Benjamin Coenen
76733f0cd4 Add unwrap block assist #4156
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Coenen <5719034+bnjjj@users.noreply.github.com>
2020-04-29 14:08:30 +02:00
adamrk
0bd7d81805 Fix comment prefix method for four slash comments 2020-04-28 21:13:37 +02:00
adamrk
b6560e3ebb Treat comments beginning with four slashes as regular line comments 2020-04-28 10:23:45 +02:00
bors[bot]
7bc7173230
Merge #4134
4134: Special case for empty comments in doc comment kind  r=matklad a=edwin0cheng

Part of #4103

Fix `ui/empty/empty-comment.rs macros`

Co-authored-by: Edwin Cheng <edwin0cheng@gmail.com>
2020-04-25 10:53:40 +00:00
Aleksey Kladov
e873469500 text-size 1.0.0 2020-04-25 12:15:32 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
63a462f37c Switch to TryFrom 2020-04-25 11:59:18 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
8843588fca Convert tests to text-size 2020-04-25 11:59:18 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
b1d5817dd1 Convert code to text-size 2020-04-25 11:59:18 +02:00
Edwin Cheng
d20eea073e Special case for empty comments 2020-04-25 17:37:34 +08:00
bors[bot]
51a0058d4c
Merge #3998 #4006
3998: Make add_function generate functions in other modules via qualified path r=matklad a=TimoFreiberg

Additional feature for #3639 

- [x] Add tests for paths with more segments
- [x] Make generating the function in another file work
- [x] Add `pub` or `pub(crate)` to the generated function if it's generated in a different module
- [x] Make the assist jump to the edited file
- [x] Enable file support in the `check_assist` helper

4006: Syntax highlighting for format strings r=matklad a=ltentrup

I have an implementation for syntax highlighting for format string modifiers `{}`.
The first commit refactors the changes in #3826 into a separate struct.
The second commit implements the highlighting: first we check in a macro call whether the macro is a format macro from `std`. In this case, we remember the format string node. If we encounter this node during syntax highlighting, we check for the format modifiers `{}` using regular expressions.

There are a few places which I am not quite sure:
- Is the way I extract the macro names correct?
- Is the `HighlightTag::Attribute` suitable for highlighting the `{}`?

Let me know what you think, any feedback is welcome!

Co-authored-by: Timo Freiberg <timo.freiberg@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Leander Tentrup <leander.tentrup@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Leander Tentrup <ltentrup@users.noreply.github.com>
2020-04-24 20:10:54 +00:00
Aleksey Kladov
dd59237e0c minor 2020-04-23 23:18:18 +02:00
Aleksey Kladov
27dd0086ea Fully get rid of SyntaxNodePtr::range 2020-04-23 21:23:36 +02:00
Leander Tentrup
445052f6d4 Adapt format specifier highlighting to support escaped squences and unicode identifiers 2020-04-22 15:28:35 +02:00
Leander Tentrup
b2829a5216 Apply suggestions from code review
Co-Authored-By: bjorn3 <bjorn3@users.noreply.github.com>
2020-04-22 10:18:46 +02:00
Timo Freiberg
f2f882bc44 Add pub(crate) to functions generated in other module 2020-04-21 23:04:44 +02:00
Timo Freiberg
317fc650d5 Make add_function generate functions in other modules via qualified path 2020-04-21 23:04:44 +02:00
bors[bot]
4a250021b1
Merge #4038
4038: Group generated ast boilerplate apart from the interesting part r=matklad a=Veetaha

Boilerplate `AstNode` and `From` impls are moved to the end further from the interesting part in `generated.rs`

Co-authored-by: veetaha <veetaha2@gmail.com>
2020-04-21 12:58:27 +00:00
Aleksey Kladov
8a04372fec Fix panic in split_imports assist
The fix is admittedly quit literally just papering over.

Long-term, I see two more principled approaches:

* we switch to a fully tree-based impl, without parse . to_string
  step; with this approach, there shouldn't be any panics. The results
  might be nonsensical, but so was the original input.

* we preserve the invariant that re-parsing constructed node is an
  identity, and make all the `make_xxx` method return an `Option`.

closes #4044
2020-04-20 16:34:01 +02:00
Leander Tentrup
ac798e1f7c Implement syntax highlighting for format strings
Detailed changes:
1) Implement a lexer for string literals that divides the string in format specifier `{}` including the format specifier modifier.
2) Adapt syntax highlighting to add ranges for the detected sequences.
3) Add a test case for the format string syntax highlighting.
2020-04-20 11:19:15 +02:00
veetaha
972d3b2ba3 Group generated ast boilerplate apart from the interesting part 2020-04-18 23:51:13 +03:00
Aleksey Kladov
cae2498513 Don't expose SyntaxNodePtr impl details 2020-04-16 21:01:04 +02:00