mikros/rust
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
39db65c526
rust/tests/ui/suggestions/struct-initializer-comma.stderr

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

24 lines
748 B
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

Suggest a comma if a struct initializer field fails to parse Currently, we emit a "try adding a comma" suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct definition. However, we emit no such suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct initializer. This commit adds a "try adding a comma" suggestion when we don't find a comma during the parsing of a struct initializer field. The change to `src/test/ui/parser/removed-syntax-with-1.stderr` isn't great, but I don't see a good way of avoiding it.
2020-02-14 21:28:13 -06:00
error: expected one of `,`, `.`, `?`, `}`, or an operator, found `second`
Audit uses of `span_suggestion_short`
2020-07-02 00:32:12 -05:00
--> $DIR/struct-initializer-comma.rs:12:9
Suggest a comma if a struct initializer field fails to parse Currently, we emit a "try adding a comma" suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct definition. However, we emit no such suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct initializer. This commit adds a "try adding a comma" suggestion when we don't find a comma during the parsing of a struct initializer field. The change to `src/test/ui/parser/removed-syntax-with-1.stderr` isn't great, but I don't see a good way of avoiding it.
2020-02-14 21:28:13 -06:00
|
Audit uses of `span_suggestion_short`
2020-07-02 00:32:12 -05:00
LL | let _ = Foo {
Suggest a comma if a struct initializer field fails to parse Currently, we emit a "try adding a comma" suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct definition. However, we emit no such suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct initializer. This commit adds a "try adding a comma" suggestion when we don't find a comma during the parsing of a struct initializer field. The change to `src/test/ui/parser/removed-syntax-with-1.stderr` isn't great, but I don't see a good way of avoiding it.
2020-02-14 21:28:13 -06:00
| --- while parsing this struct
LL |
LL | first: true
| -
| |
| expected one of `,`, `.`, `?`, `}`, or an operator
| help: try adding a comma: `,`
LL | second: 25
| ^^^^^^ unexpected token
error[E0063]: missing field `second` in initializer of `Foo`
Audit uses of `span_suggestion_short`
2020-07-02 00:32:12 -05:00
--> $DIR/struct-initializer-comma.rs:9:13
Suggest a comma if a struct initializer field fails to parse Currently, we emit a "try adding a comma" suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct definition. However, we emit no such suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct initializer. This commit adds a "try adding a comma" suggestion when we don't find a comma during the parsing of a struct initializer field. The change to `src/test/ui/parser/removed-syntax-with-1.stderr` isn't great, but I don't see a good way of avoiding it.
2020-02-14 21:28:13 -06:00
|
Audit uses of `span_suggestion_short`
2020-07-02 00:32:12 -05:00
LL | let _ = Foo {
Suggest a comma if a struct initializer field fails to parse Currently, we emit a "try adding a comma" suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct definition. However, we emit no such suggestion if a comma is missing in a struct initializer. This commit adds a "try adding a comma" suggestion when we don't find a comma during the parsing of a struct initializer field. The change to `src/test/ui/parser/removed-syntax-with-1.stderr` isn't great, but I don't see a good way of avoiding it.
2020-02-14 21:28:13 -06:00
| ^^^ missing `second`
error: aborting due to 2 previous errors
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0063`.
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink