My workflow in Visual Studio Code + Rust Analyzer has become:
1. Make a change to Rust source code using all the analysis magic
2. Save the file to trigger `cargo watch`. I have format on save enabled
for all file types so this also runs `rustfmt`
3. Fix any diagnostics that `cargo watch` finds
Unfortunately if the Rust source has any syntax errors the act of saving
will pop up a scary "command has failed" message and will switch to the
"Output" tab to show the `rustfmt` error and exit code.
I did a quick survey of what other Language Servers do in this case.
Both the JSON and TypeScript servers will swallow the error and return
success. This is consistent with how I remember my workflow in those
languages. The syntax error will show up as a diagnostic so it should
be clear why the file isn't formatting.
I checked the `rustfmt` source code and while it does distinguish "parse
errors" from "operational errors" internally they both result in exit
status of 1. However, more catastrophic errors (missing `rustfmt`,
SIGSEGV, etc) will return 127+ error codes which we can distinguish from
a normal failure.
This changes our handler to log an info message and feign success if
`rustfmt` exits with status 1.
Another option I considered was only swallowing the error if the
formatting request came from format-on-save. However, the Language
Server Protocol doesn't seem to distinguish those cases.
1443: cache chalk queries r=flodiebold a=matklad
This gives a significant speedup, because chalk will call these
functions several times even withing a single revision. The only
significant one here is `impl_data`, but I figured it might be good to
cache others just for consistency.
The results I get are:
Before:
from scratch: 16.081457952s
no change: 15.846493ms
trivial change: 352.95592ms
comment change: 361.998408ms
const change: 457.629212ms
After:
from scratch: 14.910610278s
no change: 14.934647ms
trivial change: 85.633023ms
comment change: 96.433023ms
const change: 171.543296ms
Seems like a nice win!
Co-authored-by: Aleksey Kladov <aleksey.kladov@gmail.com>
1446: Initial Visual Studio Code unit tests r=matklad a=etaoins
As promised in #1439 this is an initial attempt at unit testing the VSCode extension. There are two separate parts to this: getting the test framework working and unit testing the code in #1439.
The test framework nearly intact from the VSCode extension generator. The main thing missing was `test/index.ts` which acts as an entry point for Mocha. This was simply copied back in. I also needed to open the test VSCode instance inside a workspace as our file URI generation depends on a workspace being open.
There are two ways to run the test framework:
1. Opening the extension's source in VSCode, pressing F5 and selecting the "Extensions Test" debug target.
2. Closing all copies of VSCode and running `npm test`. This is started from the command line but actually opens a temporary VSCode window to host the tests.
This doesn't attempt to wire this up to CI. That requires running a headless X11 server which is a bit daunting. I'll assess the difficulty of that in a follow-up branch. This PR is at least helpful for local development without having to induce errors on a Rust project.
For the actual tests this uses snapshots of `rustc` output from [a real Rust project](https://github.com/etaoins/arret) captured from the command line. Except for extracting the
`message` object and reformatting they're copied verbatim into fixture JSON files.
Only four different types of diagnostics are tested but they represent the main combinations of code actions and related information possible. They can be considered the happy path tests; as we encounter corner-cases we can introduce new tests fixtures.
Co-authored-by: Ryan Cumming <etaoins@gmail.com>
As promised in #1439 this is an initial attempt at unit testing the
VSCode extension. There are two separate parts to this: getting the test
framework working and unit testing the code in #1439.
The test framework nearly intact from the VSCode extension generator.
The main thing missing was `test/index.ts` which acts as an entry point
for Mocha. This was simply copied back in. I also needed to open the
test VSCode instance inside a workspace as our file URI generation
depends on a workspace being open.
There are two ways to run the test framework:
1. Opening the extension's source in VSCode, pressing F5 and selecting
the "Extensions Test" debug target.
2. Closing all copies of VSCode and running `npm test`. This is started
from the command line but actually opens a temporary VSCode window to
host the tests.
This doesn't attempt to wire this up to CI. That requires running a
headless X11 server which is a bit daunting. I'll assess the difficulty
of that in a follow-up branch. This PR is at least helpful for local
development without having to induce errors on a Rust project.
For the actual tests this uses snapshots of `rustc` output from a real
Rust project captured from the command line. Except for extracting the
`message` object and reformatting they're copied verbatim into fixture
JSON files.
Only four different types of diagnostics are tested but they represent
the main combinations of code actions and related information possible.
They can be considered the happy path tests; as we encounter
corner-cases we can introduce new tests fixtures.
This gives a significant speedup, because chalk will call these
functions several times even withing a single revision. The only
significant one here is `impl_data`, but I figured it might be good to
cache others just for consistency.
The results I get are:
Before:
from scratch: 16.081457952s
no change: 15.846493ms
trivial change: 352.95592ms
comment change: 361.998408ms
const change: 457.629212ms
After:
from scratch: 14.910610278s
no change: 14.934647ms
trivial change: 85.633023ms
comment change: 96.433023ms
const change: 171.543296ms
Seems like a nice win!
Now, one can use `let _p = ra_prof::cpu_profiler()` to capture profile
of a block of code.
This is not an out of the box experience, as that relies on gperfools
See the docs on https://github.com/AtheMathmo/cpuprofiler for more!
1432: Make fill_match_arm work with trivial arm r=matklad a=ironyman
Addresses this issue https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/1399
One minor issue I noticed is that complete_postfix creates an arm like this
```
match E::X {
<|>_ => {},
}
```
but fill_match_arms creates arms like this
```
E::X => (),
```
Co-authored-by: ironyman <ironyman@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Changyu Li <changyl@microsoft.com>
1439: Rich mapping of cargo watch output r=matklad a=etaoins
Currently we depend on the ASCII rendering string that `rustc` provides to populate Visual Studio Code's diagnostic. This has a number of shortcomings:
1. It's not a very good use of space in the error list
2. We can't jump to secondary spans (e.g. where a called function is defined)
3. We can't use Code Actions aka Quick Fix
This moves all of the low-level parsing and mapping to a `rust_diagnostics.ts`. This uses some heuristics to map Rust diagnostics to VsCode:
1. As before, the Rust diagnostic message and primary span is used for the root diagnostic. However, we now just use the message instead of the rendered version.
2. Every secondary span is converted to "related information". This shows as child in the error list and can be jumped to.
3. Every child diagnostic is categorised in to three buckets:
1. If they have no span they're treated as another line of the root messages
2. If they have replacement text they're treated as a Code Action
3. If they have a span but no replacement text they're treated as related information (same as secondary spans).
Co-authored-by: Ryan Cumming <etaoins@gmail.com>
1436: Method resolution for slices r=sinkuu a=sinkuu
`impl<T> [T]` is separately defined in `core` and `alloc`, so I changed `def_crate` function in `method_resolution.rs` to return multiple crates.
Co-authored-by: Shotaro Yamada <sinkuu@sinkuu.xyz>
The first cut was a bit rough with the blanket `unused_*` rule. This
trigger for things like `unused_mut` where the code is used but it's
suboptimal. It's misleading to grey out the code in those cases.
Instead, use an explicit list of things known to be dead code.
Currently we depend on the ASCII rendering string that `rustc` provides
to populate Visual Studio Code's diagnostic. This has a number of
shortcomings:
1. It's not a very good use of space in the error list
2. We can't jump to secondary spans (e.g. where a called function is
defined)
3. We can't use Code Actions aka Quick Fix
This moves all of the low-level parsing and mapping to a
`rust_diagnostics.ts`. This uses some heuristics to map Rust diagnostics
to VsCode:
1. As before, the Rust diagnostic message and primary span is used for
the root diagnostic. However, we now just use the message instead of
the rendered version.
2. Every secondary span is converted to "related information". This
shows as child in the error list and can be jumped to.
3. Every child diagnostic is categorised in to three buckets:
1. If they have no span they're treated as another line of the root
messages
2. If they have replacement text they're treated as a Code Action
3. If they have a span but no replacement text they're treated as
related information (same as secondary spans).
1434: Introduce cargo-watch.check-command option for Code extension r=matklad a=alekseysidorov
By this option you can replace `check` command in `cargo watch` by the something else like `clippy`.
Co-authored-by: Aleksei Sidorov <aleksei.sidorov@xdev.re>
Co-authored-by: Aleksey Sidorov <alekseysidorov@users.noreply.github.com>
1413: More details on how to set up coc r=matklad a=mark-i-m
I spent ~1 hour trying to figure this out. It's all pretty simple stuff, but very annoying...
Co-authored-by: Who? Me?! <mark-i-m@users.noreply.github.com>
