mikros/rust
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
rust/tests/ui/async-await/issue-61076.stderr

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

78 lines
2.6 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

pretty: trim paths of unique symbols If a symbol name can only be imported from one place for a type, and as long as it was not glob-imported anywhere in the current crate, we can trim its printed path and print only the name. This has wide implications on error messages with types, for example, shortening `std::vec::Vec` to just `Vec`, as long as there is no other `Vec` importable anywhere. This adds a new '-Z trim-diagnostic-paths=false' option to control this feature. On the good path, with no diagnosis printed, we should try to avoid issuing this query, so we need to prevent trimmed_def_paths query on several cases. This change also relies on a previous commit that differentiates between `Debug` and `Display` on various rustc types, where the latter is trimmed and presented to the user and the former is not.
2020-09-02 10:40:56 +03:00
error[E0277]: the `?` operator can only be applied to values that implement `Try`
suggest await before method
2020-08-20 15:34:08 +08:00
--> $DIR/issue-61076.rs:42:5
bless ui tests
2020-05-10 22:34:20 +08:00
|
LL | foo()?;
Print output ty for opaque future ty
2021-11-16 16:16:23 -08:00
| ^^^^^^ the `?` operator cannot be applied to type `impl Future<Output = Result<(), ()>>`
bless ui tests
2020-05-10 22:34:20 +08:00
|
Print output ty for opaque future ty
2021-11-16 16:16:23 -08:00
= help: the trait `Try` is not implemented for `impl Future<Output = Result<(), ()>>`
Tweak "use `.await`" suggestion
2020-10-21 14:25:09 -07:00
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
LL | foo().await?;
Modify structured suggestion output * On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format * When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline * Color highlight modified span
2021-06-21 19:07:19 -07:00
| ++++++
bless ui tests
2020-05-10 22:34:20 +08:00
pretty: trim paths of unique symbols If a symbol name can only be imported from one place for a type, and as long as it was not glob-imported anywhere in the current crate, we can trim its printed path and print only the name. This has wide implications on error messages with types, for example, shortening `std::vec::Vec` to just `Vec`, as long as there is no other `Vec` importable anywhere. This adds a new '-Z trim-diagnostic-paths=false' option to control this feature. On the good path, with no diagnosis printed, we should try to avoid issuing this query, so we need to prevent trimmed_def_paths query on several cases. This change also relies on a previous commit that differentiates between `Debug` and `Display` on various rustc types, where the latter is trimmed and presented to the user and the former is not.
2020-09-02 10:40:56 +03:00
error[E0277]: the `?` operator can only be applied to values that implement `Try`
Remove confusing 'while checking' note from opaque future type mismatches
2023-01-22 16:28:23 +00:00
--> $DIR/issue-61076.rs:62:5
implement type_implments_trait query
2020-05-14 23:07:46 +08:00
|
LL | t?;
Tweak "use `.await`" suggestion
2020-10-21 14:25:09 -07:00
| ^^ the `?` operator cannot be applied to type `T`
implement type_implments_trait query
2020-05-14 23:07:46 +08:00
|
pretty: trim paths of unique symbols If a symbol name can only be imported from one place for a type, and as long as it was not glob-imported anywhere in the current crate, we can trim its printed path and print only the name. This has wide implications on error messages with types, for example, shortening `std::vec::Vec` to just `Vec`, as long as there is no other `Vec` importable anywhere. This adds a new '-Z trim-diagnostic-paths=false' option to control this feature. On the good path, with no diagnosis printed, we should try to avoid issuing this query, so we need to prevent trimmed_def_paths query on several cases. This change also relies on a previous commit that differentiates between `Debug` and `Display` on various rustc types, where the latter is trimmed and presented to the user and the former is not.
2020-09-02 10:40:56 +03:00
= help: the trait `Try` is not implemented for `T`
Tweak "use `.await`" suggestion
2020-10-21 14:25:09 -07:00
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
LL | t.await?;
Modify structured suggestion output * On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format * When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline * Color highlight modified span
2021-06-21 19:07:19 -07:00
| ++++++
implement type_implments_trait query
2020-05-14 23:07:46 +08:00
Print output ty for opaque future ty
2021-11-16 16:16:23 -08:00
error[E0609]: no field `0` on type `impl Future<Output = Tuple>`
Remove confusing 'while checking' note from opaque future type mismatches
2023-01-22 16:28:23 +00:00
--> $DIR/issue-61076.rs:71:26
append more test cases for issue 61076
2020-05-30 22:57:12 +08:00
|
suggest await on field access
2020-08-16 20:25:22 +08:00
LL | let _: i32 = tuple().0;
Suggest calling await on method call and field access When encountering a failing method or field resolution on a `Future`, look at the `Output` and try the same operation on it. If successful, suggest calling `.await` on the `Future`. This had already been introduced in #72784, but at some point they stopped working.
2020-10-23 10:54:34 -07:00
| ^ field not available in `impl Future`, but it is available in its `Output`
|
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future` and access the field of its `Output`
|
LL | let _: i32 = tuple().await.0;
Modify structured suggestion output * On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format * When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline * Color highlight modified span
2021-06-21 19:07:19 -07:00
| ++++++
append more test cases for issue 61076
2020-05-30 22:57:12 +08:00
Print output ty for opaque future ty
2021-11-16 16:16:23 -08:00
error[E0609]: no field `a` on type `impl Future<Output = Struct>`
Remove confusing 'while checking' note from opaque future type mismatches
2023-01-22 16:28:23 +00:00
--> $DIR/issue-61076.rs:75:28
append more test cases for issue 61076
2020-05-30 22:57:12 +08:00
|
suggest await on field access
2020-08-16 20:25:22 +08:00
LL | let _: i32 = struct_().a;
Suggest calling await on method call and field access When encountering a failing method or field resolution on a `Future`, look at the `Output` and try the same operation on it. If successful, suggest calling `.await` on the `Future`. This had already been introduced in #72784, but at some point they stopped working.
2020-10-23 10:54:34 -07:00
| ^ field not available in `impl Future`, but it is available in its `Output`
|
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future` and access the field of its `Output`
|
LL | let _: i32 = struct_().await.a;
Modify structured suggestion output * On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format * When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline * Color highlight modified span
2021-06-21 19:07:19 -07:00
| ++++++
append more test cases for issue 61076
2020-05-30 22:57:12 +08:00
Print output ty for opaque future ty
2021-11-16 16:16:23 -08:00
error[E0599]: no method named `method` found for opaque type `impl Future<Output = Struct>` in the current scope
Remove confusing 'while checking' note from opaque future type mismatches
2023-01-22 16:28:23 +00:00
--> $DIR/issue-61076.rs:79:15
suggest await before method
2020-08-20 15:34:08 +08:00
|
LL | struct_().method();
Print output ty for opaque future ty
2021-11-16 16:16:23 -08:00
| ^^^^^^ method not found in `impl Future<Output = Struct>`
Suggest calling await on method call and field access When encountering a failing method or field resolution on a `Future`, look at the `Output` and try the same operation on it. If successful, suggest calling `.await` on the `Future`. This had already been introduced in #72784, but at some point they stopped working.
2020-10-23 10:54:34 -07:00
|
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future` and calling the method on its `Output`
|
LL | struct_().await.method();
Modify structured suggestion output * On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format * When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline * Color highlight modified span
2021-06-21 19:07:19 -07:00
| ++++++
suggest await before method
2020-08-20 15:34:08 +08:00
suggest await on unexpected types
2020-08-20 18:42:08 +08:00
error[E0308]: mismatched types
Remove confusing 'while checking' note from opaque future type mismatches
2023-01-22 16:28:23 +00:00
--> $DIR/issue-61076.rs:88:9
suggest await on unexpected types
2020-08-20 18:42:08 +08:00
|
Point (again) to more expressions with their type, even if not fully resolved
2021-12-15 23:16:21 +00:00
LL | match tuple() {
| ------- this expression has type `impl Future<Output = Tuple>`
LL |
suggest await on unexpected types
2020-08-20 18:42:08 +08:00
LL | Tuple(_) => {}
fix: improve the suggestion on future not awaited Considering the following code ```rust fn foo() -> u8 { async fn async_fn() -> u8 { 22 } async_fn() } fn main() {} ``` the error generated before this commit from the compiler is ``` ➜ rust git:(macros/async_fn_suggestion) ✗ rustc test.rs --edition 2021 error[E0308]: mismatched types --> test.rs:4:5 | 1 | fn foo() -> u8 { | -- expected `u8` because of return type ... 4 | async_fn() | ^^^^^^^^^^ expected `u8`, found opaque type | = note: expected type `u8` found opaque type `impl Future<Output = u8>` help: consider `await`ing on the `Future` | 4 | async_fn().await | ++++++ error: aborting due to previous error ``` In this case the error is nor perfect, and can confuse the user that do not know that the opaque type is the future. So this commit will propose (and conclude the work start in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/80658) to change the string `opaque type` to `future` when applicable and also remove the Expected vs Received note by adding a more specific one regarding the async function that return a future type. So the new error emitted by the compiler is ``` error[E0308]: mismatched types --> test.rs:4:5 | 1 | fn foo() -> u8 { | -- expected `u8` because of return type ... 4 | async_fn() | ^^^^^^^^^^ expected `u8`, found future | note: calling an async function returns a future --> test.rs:4:5 | 4 | async_fn() | ^^^^^^^^^^ help: consider `await`ing on the `Future` | 4 | async_fn().await | ++++++ error: aborting due to previous error ``` Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
2023-02-10 19:03:54 +01:00
| ^^^^^^^^ expected future, found `Tuple`
suggest await on unexpected types
2020-08-20 18:42:08 +08:00
|
Print output ty for opaque future ty
2021-11-16 16:16:23 -08:00
= note: expected opaque type `impl Future<Output = Tuple>`
suggest await on unexpected types
2020-08-20 18:42:08 +08:00
found struct `Tuple`
Add more `.await` suggestions on E0308
2020-10-22 19:03:36 -07:00
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
LL | match tuple().await {
Modify structured suggestion output * On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format * When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline * Color highlight modified span
2021-06-21 19:07:19 -07:00
| ++++++
suggest await on unexpected types
2020-08-20 18:42:08 +08:00
error: aborting due to 6 previous errors
bless ui tests
2020-05-10 22:34:20 +08:00
suggest await on unexpected types
2020-08-20 18:42:08 +08:00
Some errors have detailed explanations: E0277, E0308, E0599, E0609.
append more test cases for issue 61076
2020-05-30 22:57:12 +08:00
For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0277`.
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink