3309: Find cargo toml up the fs r=matklad a=not-much-io
Currently rust-analyzer will look for Cargo.toml in the root of the project and if failing that then go down the filesystem until root.
This unfortunately wouldn't work automatically with (what I imagine is) a fairly common project structure. As an example with multiple languages like:
```
js/
..
rust/
Cargo.toml
...
```
Added this small change so rust-analyzer would glance one level up if not found in root or down the filesystem.
## Why not go deeper?
Could be problematic with large project vendored dependencies etc.
## Why not add a Cargo.toml manual setting option?
Loosely related and a good idea, however the convenience of having this automated also is hard to pass up.
## Testing?
Build a binary with various logs and checked it in a project with such a structure:
```
[ERROR ra_project_model] find_cargo_toml()
[ERROR ra_project_model] find_cargo_toml_up_the_fs()
[ERROR ra_project_model] entities: ReadDir("/workspaces/my-project")
[ERROR ra_project_model] candidate: "/workspaces/my-project/rust/Cargo.toml", exists: true
```
## Edge Cases?
If you have multiple Cargo.toml files one level deeper AND not in the root, will get whatever comes first (order undefined), example:
```
crate1/
Cargo.toml
crate2/
Cargo.toml
... (no root Cargo.toml)
```
However this is quite unusual and wouldn't have worked before either. This is only resolvable via manually choosing.
Co-authored-by: nmio <kristo.koert@gmail.com>
3376: Fix a common false-positive type mismatch r=matklad a=flodiebold
E.g. for `&{ some_string() }` in a context where a `&str` is expected, we
reported a mismatch inside the block. The problem is that we're passing an
expectation of `str` down, but the expectation is more of a hint in this case.
There's a long comment in rustc about this, which I just copied.
Also, fix reported location for type mismatches in macros.
Co-authored-by: Florian Diebold <flodiebold@gmail.com>
E.g. for `&{ some_string() }` in a context where a `&str` is expected, we
reported a mismatch inside the block. The problem is that we're passing an
expectation of `str` down, but the expectation is more of a hint in this case.
There's a long comment in rustc about this, which I just copied.
Also, fix reported location for type mismatches in macros.
3366: Simpilfy original_range logic r=matklad a=edwin0cheng
This PR fixed another [bug](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/3000#issuecomment-592474844) which incorrectly map the wrong range of `punct` in macro_call and simplify the logic a little bit by introducing an `ascend_call_token` function.
Co-authored-by: Edwin Cheng <edwin0cheng@gmail.com>
3362: removing ctrl+r key binding fixes#2733 r=matklad a=jasonwilliams
@matklad i didn't see this mentioned anywhere else in the features.md
Co-authored-by: Jason Williams <jwilliams720@bloomberg.net>
3361: Reset fontStyle for inlay hints r=matklad a=matklad
Otherwise, we get bold hints on `true` and `false`
bors r+
🤖
Co-authored-by: Aleksey Kladov <aleksey.kladov@gmail.com>
