After the removal of the "restricted keyword" feature in 0c82c00dc4 , there's no longer any difference between parse_ident() and parse_value_ident(), and therefore no difference between parse parse_path_without_tps() and parse_value_path(). I've collapsed all of these, removing the redundant functions and eliminating the need for two higher-order arguments.
Macro invocations with path separators (e.g. foo::bar!()) now produce a sensible error message, rather than an assertion failure. Also added compile-fail test case.
Fixes#5218 ?
I've found that unused imports can often start cluttering a project after a long time, and it's very useful to keep them under control. I don't like how Go forces a compiler error by default and it can't be changed, but I certainly want to know about them so I think that a warn is a good default.
Now that the `unused_imports` lint option is a bit smarter, I think it's possible to change the default level to warn. This commit also removes all unused imports throughout the compiler and libraries (500+).
The only odd things that I ran into were that some `use` statements had to have `#[cfg(notest)]` or `#[cfg(test)]` based on where they were. The ones with `notest` were mostly in core for modules like `cmp` whereas `cfg(test)` was for tests that weren't part of a normal `mod test` module.
My merges for #5143 missed a couple other copies. This patch corrects this, and gets stage0 to compile libsyntax with `#[deny(vecs_implicitly_copyable)]`. stage1 still fails though.
The fix is straight-forward, but there are several changes
while fixing the issue.
1) disallow `mut` keyword when making a new struct
In code base, there are following code,
```rust
struct Foo { mut a: int };
let a = Foo { mut a: 1 };
```
This is because of structural record, which is
deprecated corrently (see issue #3089) In structural
record, `mut` keyword should be allowd to control
mutability. But without structural record, we don't
need to allow `mut` keyword while constructing struct.
2) disallow structural records in parser level
This is related to 1). With structural records, there
is an ambiguity between empty block and empty struct
To solve the problem, I change parser to stop parsing
structural records. I think this is not a problem,
because structural records are not compiled already.
Misc. issues
There is an ambiguity between empty struct vs. empty match stmt.
with following code,
```rust
match x{} {}
```
Two interpretation is possible, which is listed blow
```rust
match (x{}) {} // matching with newly-constructed empty struct
(match x{}) {} // matching with empty enum(or struct) x
// and then empty block
```
It seems that there is no such code in rust code base, but
there is one test which uses empty match statement:
https://github.com/mozilla/rust/blob/incoming/src/test/run-pass/issue-3037.rs
All other cases could be distinguished with look-ahead,
but this can't be. One possible solution is wrapping with
parentheses when matching with an uninhabited type.
```rust
enum what { }
fn match_with_empty(x: what) -> ~str {
match (x) { //use parentheses to remove the ambiguity
}
}
```
- Removed space between struct name and parentheses
- Fixed indentation of the rest of the file (missing end)
- Don't print parentheses for structs with no fields
- Added test
- Removed space between struct name and parentheses
- Fixed indentation of the rest of the file (missing end)
- Don't print parentheses for structs with no fields
- Added test
