10796: ide: display static values in hover r=Veykril a=jhgg
Continuation from #10785 - does the same thing, but for `static`'s as well.
Co-authored-by: Jake Heinz <jh@discordapp.com>
10795: Remove unwrap in doc path resolution r=Veykril a=udoprog
I keep hitting this constantly in my project, and I haven't dug very deep into the root cause. But seeing as the project otherwise compiles it appears to be something unsupported is being incorrectly parsed in rust-analyzer which for other cases is handled by returning `None`.
Co-authored-by: John-John Tedro <udoprog@tedro.se>
10781: internal: Do not use reference search in `runnables::related_tests` r=Veykril a=Veykril
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
10704: internal: Short-circuit `descend_into_macros_single` r=Veykril a=Veykril
There is no need to descend everything if all we are interested in is the first mapping.
This bring `descend_into_macros` timing in highlighting in `rust-analyzer/src/config.rs` from `154ms - descend_into_macros (2190 calls)` to `24ms - descend_into_macros (2190 calls)` since we use the single variant there(will regress once we want to highlight multiple namespaces again though).
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
10703: internal: Don't check items for macro calls if they have no attributes r=Veykril a=Veykril
Turns out when highlighting we currently populate the Dynmaps of pretty much every item in a file, who would've known that would be so costly...
Shaves off 250 ms for the integrated benchmark on `rust-analyzer/src/config.rs`.
We are still looking at a heft `154ms - descend_into_macros (2190 calls)` but I feel like this is slowly nearing towards just call overhead.
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
10701: internal: Cache ast::MacroCalls to their expansions in Semantics::descend_into_macros_impl r=Veykril a=Veykril
Saves ~45ms when highlighting `rust-analyzer/src/config.rs` for me
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
10686: internal: Add `Semantics::original_ast_node` for upmapping nodes out of macro files r=Veykril a=Veykril
Fixes trying to insert imports into macro expanded files which then do text edits on very wrong text ranges.
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
10563: feat: Make "Generate getter" assist use semantic info r=agluszak a=agluszak
This PR makes "Generate getter" assist use semantic info instead of dealing with types encoded as strings.
Getters for types which are:
- `Copy` no longer return references
- `AsRef<str>` (i.e. `String`) return `&str` (instead of `&String`)
- `AsRef<[T]>` (i.e. `Vec<T>`) return `&[T]` (instead of `&Vec<T>`)
- `AsRef<T>` (i.e. `Box<T>`) return `&T` (instead of `&Box<T>`)
- `Option<T>` return `Option<&T>` (instead of `&Option<T>`)
- `Result<T, E>` return `Result<&T, &E>` (instead of `&Result<T, E>`)
String, Vec, Box and Option were previously handled as special cases.
Closes#10295
Co-authored-by: Andrzej Głuszak <gluszak.andrzej@gmail.com>
10546: feat: Implement promote_local_to_const assist r=Veykril a=Veykril
Fixes#7692, that is now one can invoke the `extract_variable` assist on something and then follow that up with this assist to turn it into a const.
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
This renames `descend_into_macros` to `descend_into_macros_single` and `descend_into_macros_many` into `descend_into_macros`.
However, this does not touch a function in `SemanticsImpl` of same name.
10440: Fix Clippy warnings and replace some `if let`s with `match` r=Veykril a=arzg
I decided to try fixing a bunch of Clippy warnings. I am aware of this project’s opinion of Clippy (I have read both [rust-lang/clippy#5537](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/5537) and [rust-analyzer/rowan#57 (comment)](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rowan/pull/57#discussion_r415676159)), so I totally understand if part of or the entirety of this PR is rejected. In particular, I can see how the semicolons and `if let` vs `match` commits provide comparatively little benefit when compared to the ensuing churn.
I tried to separate each kind of change into its own commit to make it easier to discard certain changes. I also only applied Clippy suggestions where I thought they provided a definite improvement to the code (apart from semicolons, which is IMO more of a formatting/consistency question than a linting question). In the end I accumulated a list of 28 Clippy lints I ignored entirely.
Sidenote: I should really have asked about this on Zulip before going through all 1,555 `if let`s in the codebase to decide which ones definitely look better as `match` :P
Co-authored-by: Aramis Razzaghipour <aramisnoah@gmail.com>
Consider these expples
{ 92 }
async { 92 }
'a: { 92 }
#[a] { 92 }
Previously the tree for them were
BLOCK_EXPR
{ ... }
EFFECT_EXPR
async
BLOCK_EXPR
{ ... }
EFFECT_EXPR
'a:
BLOCK_EXPR
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
#[a]
{ ... }
As you see, it gets progressively worse :) The last two items are
especially odd. The last one even violates the balanced curleys
invariant we have (#10357) The new approach is to say that the stuff in
`{}` is stmt_list, and the block is stmt_list + optional modifiers
BLOCK_EXPR
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
async
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
'a:
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
#[a]
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
Should fix#10090, #10046, #10179.
This is only a workaround, but the proper fix requires some bigger
refactoring (also related to fixing #10058), and this at least prevents
the crash.
9970: feat: Implement attribute input token mapping, fix attribute item token mapping r=Veykril a=Veykril
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3757771/130328577-4c1ad72c-51b1-47c3-8d3d-3242ec44a355.png)
The token mapping for items with attributes got overwritten partially by the attributes non-item input, since attributes have two different inputs, the item and the direct input both.
This PR gives attributes a second TokenMap for its direct input. We now shift all normal input IDs by the item input maximum(we maybe wanna swap this see below) similar to what we do for macro-rules/def. For mapping down we then have to figure out whether we are inside the direct attribute input or its item input to pick the appropriate mapping which can be done with some token range comparisons.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/9867
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>