The `LifetimeParam` and `Local` variants use `source()` to find their
range. Now that `source()` returns an `Option` we need to handle the
`None` case.
In #6901 some special case handling for proc-macros was introduced to
prevent panicing as they have no AST. Now the new HasSource::source
method is used that returns an option.
Generally this was a pretty trivial change, the only thing of much
interest is that `hir::MacroDef` now implements `TryToNav` not `ToNav`
as this allows us to handle `HasSource::source` now returning an option.
7116: Fix deep syntax tree bug generated by proc-macro r=jonas-schievink a=edwin0cheng
This PR fixed a bug from `semver-parser` and `pest_derive` crates which generate a very deep syntax tree such that serde reject to de-serialize. To fix this bug, we disabled recursion limit in `serde` (by calling [`Deserializer::disable_recursion_limit`](https://docs.rs/serde_json/1.0.61/serde_json/struct.Deserializer.html#method.disable_recursion_limit))
I have a feeling that we still need some way to protect against bad proc-macro generating huge syntax node, but I have no idea right now.
r? @jonas-schievink
Fixes#7103
Co-authored-by: Edwin Cheng <edwin0cheng@gmail.com>
7102: Fix completion of Default struct update syntax r=Veykril a=nick96
Previously the inserted text was always `..Default::default()` which ends up as `...Default::default()`
if `.` was typed. Now checks if the current token is `.` and inserts `.Default::default()`
if it is, so `..Default::default()` is correctly completed.
I think there's probably a better way to implement this context aware completion because I've seen it in other parts of rust-analyzer as a user but I'm not sure how to do it.
Fixes#6969
Co-authored-by: Nick Spain <nicholas.spain@stileeducation.com>
7071: Pass --all-targets to "cargo check" when discovering external resources r=matklad a=WasabiFan
There is a repro case and background in the linked issue.
In short, the goal of this MR is to allow rust-analyzer to discover proc-macros which come from your tests (including, most importantly, dev-dependencies).
By default, `cargo check` implies the equivalent of `--lib --bins`, meaning it'll check your libraries and binaries -- but not tests! This means proc-macros (or, I guess, build scripts as well) weren't discovered by rust-analyzer if they came from tests.
One solution would be to manually add `--lib --bins --tests` (i.e., just augment the effective options to include tests). However, in this MR, I threw in `--all-targets`, which [according to the docs](https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/commands/cargo-check.html#target-selection) implies `--benches --examples` too. I have absolutely no idea what repercussions that will have on rust-analyzer for other projects, nor do I know if it's a problem that build scripts will now be discovered for tests/examples/benches. But I am not aware of a reason you _wouldn't_ want to discover these things in your examples too.
I think the main drawback of this change is that it will likely slow down the `cargo check`. At a minimum, it'll now be checking your tests _and_ their dependencies. The `cargo check` docs also say that including `--tests` as I have here may cause your lib crate to be built _twice_, once for the normal target and again for unit tests. My reading of that caveat suggests that "building twice" means it's built once for the tests _inside_ your lib, with a test profile, and again for any consumers of your lib, now using a normal release profile or similar. This doesn't seem surprising.
Very minor caveat: `--tests` will not include tests within a binary if it has `test = false` set in `Cargo.toml`. (I discovered this manually by trial-and-error, but hey, it actually says that in the docs!) This is likely not an issue, but _does_ mean that if you are -- for whatever reason -- disabling tests like that and then manually specifying `cargo test --package <...> --bin <...>` to run them, rust-analyzer will remain unaware of proc-macros in your tests.
I have confirmed this fixes the original issue in my sandbox example linked in #7034 and in my own project in which I originally discovered this. I've left it configured as my default RA language server and will report back if I notice any unexpected side-effects.
Fixes#7034
Co-authored-by: Kaelin Laundry <wasabifan@outlook.com>
In an attempt to fix#6052 and #4249 this attempts to detect
if rustfmt is a rustup proxy which isn't installed, and reports
the error message to the user for them to fix.
In theory this ought to be memoised but for now it'll do as-is.
Future work might be to ask the user if they would like us to
trigger the installation (if possible).
Signed-off-by: Daniel Silverstone <dsilvers@digital-scurf.org>
Previously the inserted text was always `..Default::default()` which ends up as `...Default::default()`
if `.` was typed. Now checks if the current token is `.` and inserts `.Default::default()`
if it is, so `..Default::default()` is correctly completed.
Fixes#6969
7083: Refactor mbe parsing code r=edwin0cheng a=edwin0cheng
Inspire by #5426 , this PR refactor out the parsing code such that it only parsed on `mbe::Rule`, but not on invocations.
However, it just improve the overall performance unnoticeablely :(
Co-authored-by: Edwin Cheng <edwin0cheng@gmail.com>
7064: Ignore qualifiers when doing autoimport completions lookup r=lnicola a=SomeoneToIgnore
A follow-up of https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/6918#issuecomment-748511151 and the PR itself.
Tweaks the `import_map` query api to be more flexible with the ways to match against the import path and now fuzzy imports search in names only.
This had improved the completion speed for me locally in ~5 times for `fuzzy_completion` span time, but please recheck me here.
IMO we're fast and presice enough now, so I've added the modules back to the fuzzy search output.
Also tweaks the the expect tests to display functions explicitly, to avoid confusing "duplicate" results.
Co-authored-by: Kirill Bulatov <mail4score@gmail.com>
7075: format-postfix completion takes format instead of fmt r=lnicola a=Veykril
See https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/6843
this brings it back in line with the documentation
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
