Without this users have no clue why flycheck fails to run.
This is what is printed to the output channel:
```
[ERROR rust_analyzer::main_loop] cargo check failed: Cargo watcher failed,the command produced no valid metadata (exit code: ExitStatus(ExitStatus(25856)))
```
I stumbled with this figuring out that rust-analyzer adds `--all-features` which is not intended
for some crates in the workspace (e.g. they have mutually-exclusive features.
Having the command rust-analyzer ran should help a lot
Taking a reference to a misaligned field on a packed struct is an
unsafe operation. Highlight that behavior. Currently, the misaligned
part isn't tracked, so this highlight is a bit too aggressive.
5692: Add support for extern crate r=jonas-schievink a=Nashenas88
This adds syntax highlighting, hover and goto def functionality for extern crate.
Fixes#5690
Co-authored-by: Paul Daniel Faria <Nashenas88@users.noreply.github.com>
5693: Fix no inlay hints / unresolved tokens until manual edit to refresh r=jonas-schievink a=Veetaha
Fixes https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/5349
Now we return ContentModified during the workspace loading. This signifies the language
client to retry the operation (i.e. the client will
continue polling the server while it returns ContentModified).
I believe that there might be cases of overly big projects where the backoff
logic we have setup in `sendRequestWithRetry` (which we use for inlay hints)
might bail too early (currently the largest retry standby time is 10 seconds).
However, I've tried on one of my project with 500+ dependencies and it is still enough.
Here are the examples before/after the change (the gifs are quite lengthy because they show testing rather large cargo workspace).
<details>
<summary>Before</summary>
Here you can see that the client receives empty array of inlay hints and does nothing more.
Same applies to semantic tokens. The client receives unresolved tokens and does nothing more.
The user needs to do a manual edit to refresh the editor.
</details>
<details>
<summary>After</summary>
Here the server returns ContentModified, so the client periodically retries the requests and eventually receives the wellformed response.
</details>
Co-authored-by: Veetaha <veetaha2@gmail.com>
5414: Fix test code lens r=jonas-schievink a=avrong
Closes#5217
The implementation is quite similar to #4821. Maybe we should somehow deal with duplicated code.
Also, both of these requests introduce some unclear behavior. I'm not sure how to process this, therefore asking for advice. Examples are below.
<img width="286" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/6342851/87713209-83595f80-c7b2-11ea-8c0f-a12e7571e7df.png">
Co-authored-by: Aleksei Trifonov <avrong@avrong.me>
