4784: Change management of test cfg to better support json projects r=Nashenas88 a=Nashenas88
This helps support json projects where they can decide whether to add the `test` cfg or not. One alternative is to add support for marking json project crates as a sysroot crate, and adding logic to remove the `test` cfg in those cases. In my opinion, that option gives less flexibility to json projects and leads to more functionality that needs to be maintained.
Fixes#4508
cc @woody77
Co-authored-by: Paul Daniel Faria <Nashenas88@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Paul Daniel Faria <nashenas88@users.noreply.github.com>
4729: Hover actions r=matklad a=vsrs
This PR adds a `hoverActions` LSP extension and a `Go to Implementations` action as an example:
4748: Add an `ImportMap` and use it to resolve item paths in `find_path` r=matklad a=jonas-schievink
Removes the "go faster" queries I added in https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/4501 and https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/4506. I've checked this PR on the rustc code base and the assists are still fast.
This should fix https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/4515.
Note that this does introduce a change in behavior: We now always refer to items defined in external crates using paths through the external crate. Previously we could also use a local path (if for example the extern crate was reexported locally), as seen in the changed test. If that is undesired I can fix that, but the test didn't say why the previous behavior would be preferable.
Co-authored-by: vsrs <vit@conrlab.com>
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonasschievink@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonas.schievink@ferrous-systems.com>
4740: Remove unneeded "./" prefix affecting error messages r=kjeremy a=dtolnay
I noticed this in the error in the commit message of https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/4739.
Before:
```console
error[E0599]: no method named `initialize_finish` found for struct `lsp_server::Connection` in the current scope
--> crates/rust-analyzer/./src/bin/main.rs:99:16
|
99 | connection.initialize_finish(initialize_id, initialize_result)?;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ method not found in `lsp_server::Connection`
```
After:
```console
error[E0599]: no method named `initialize_finish` found for struct `lsp_server::Connection` in the current scope
--> crates/rust-analyzer/src/bin/main.rs:99:16
|
99 | connection.initialize_finish(initialize_id, initialize_result)?;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ method not found in `lsp_server::Connection`
```
```diff
- --> crates/rust-analyzer/./src/bin/main.rs:99:16
+ --> crates/rust-analyzer/src/bin/main.rs:99:16
```
Co-authored-by: David Tolnay <dtolnay@gmail.com>
Before:
error[E0599]: no method named `initialize_finish` found for struct `lsp_server::Connection` in the current scope
--> crates/rust-analyzer/./src/bin/main.rs:99:16
|
99 | connection.initialize_finish(initialize_id, initialize_result)?;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ method not found in `lsp_server::Connection`
After:
error[E0599]: no method named `initialize_finish` found for struct `lsp_server::Connection` in the current scope
--> crates/rust-analyzer/src/bin/main.rs:99:16
|
99 | connection.initialize_finish(initialize_id, initialize_result)?;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ method not found in `lsp_server::Connection`
My codebase already depended on lsp-server and introducing a dependency
on rust-analyzer failed at first because it assumes some functions that
were first present in lsp-server 0.3.2.
Without this change:
error[E0599]: no method named `initialize_start` found for struct `lsp_server::Connection` in the current scope
--> crates/rust-analyzer/./src/bin/main.rs:83:57
|
83 | let (initialize_id, initialize_params) = connection.initialize_start()?;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ method not found in `lsp_server::Connection`
error[E0599]: no method named `initialize_finish` found for struct `lsp_server::Connection` in the current scope
--> crates/rust-analyzer/./src/bin/main.rs:99:16
|
99 | connection.initialize_finish(initialize_id, initialize_result)?;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ method not found in `lsp_server::Connection`
Eventually, we should support "just open random rust file" use case,
we don't really do this now, so let's avoid spending time on it until
we fix it properly.
As per matklad, we now pass the responsibility for finding the binary to the frontend.
Also, added caching for finding the binary path to reduce
the amount of filesystem interactions.
The line separator is moved below the function signature to split
regions between the docs. This is very similar to how IntelliJ
displays tooltips. Adding an additional separator between the module
name and function signature currently has rendering issues.
Fixes#4594
Alternative to #4615
4602: Add boolean literal semantic token type to package.json r=matklad a=lnicola
Closes#4583.
CC @GrayJack
4603: Add self keyword semantic token type r=matklad a=lnicola
Not sure if this is warranted a new token type or just a modifier.
---
CC #4583, @GrayJack
Co-authored-by: Laurențiu Nicola <lnicola@dend.ro>
4571: KISS SourceChange r=matklad a=matklad
The idea behind requiring the label is a noble one, but we are not
really using it consistently anyway, and it should be easy to retrofit
later, should we need it.
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Aleksey Kladov <aleksey.kladov@gmail.com>
The idea behind requiring the label is a noble one, but we are not
really using it consistently anyway, and it should be easy to retrofit
later, should we need it.
4516: LSP: Two stage initialization r=kjeremy a=kjeremy
Fills in server information.
Derives CodeAction capabilities from the client. If code action literals
are unsupported we fall back to the "simple support" which just sends back
commands (this is already supported in our config). The difference being
that we did not adjust our server capabilities so that if the client was
checking for `CodeActionProvider: "true"` in the response that would have failed.
Part of #144Fixes#4130 (the specific case called out in that issue)
Co-authored-by: kjeremy <kjeremy@gmail.com>
This also changes our handiling of snippet edits on the client side.
`editor.insertSnippet` unfortunately forces indentation, which we
really don't want to have to deal with. So, let's just implement our
manual hacky way of dealing with a simple subset of snippets we
actually use in rust-analyzer
Fills in server information.
Derives CodeAction capabilities from the client. If code action literals
are unsupported we fall back to the "simple support" which just sends back
commands (this is already supported in our config). The difference being
that we did not adjust our server capabilities so that if the client was
checking for `CodeActionProvider: "true"` in the response that would have failed.
4448: Generate configuration for launch.json r=vsrs a=vsrs
This PR adds two new commands: `"rust-analyzer.debug"` and `"rust-analyzer.newDebugConfig"`. The former is a supplement to the existing `"rust-analyzer.run"` command and works the same way: asks for a runnable and starts new debug session. The latter allows adding a new configuration to **launch.json** (or to update an existing one).
If the new option `"rust-analyzer.debug.useLaunchJson"` is set to true then `"rust-analyzer.debug"` and Debug Lens will first look for existing debug configuration in **launch.json**. That is, it has become possible to specify startup arguments, env variables, etc.
`"rust-analyzer.debug.useLaunchJson"` is false by default, but it might be worth making true the default value. Personally I prefer true, but I'm not sure if it is good for all value.
----
I think that this PR also solves https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/3441.
Both methods to update launch.json mentioned in the issue do not work:
1. Menu. It is only possible to add a launch.json configuration template via a debug adapter. And anyway it's only a template and it is impossible to specify arguments from an extension.
2. DebugConfigurationProvider. The exact opposite situation: it is possible to specify all debug session settings, but it is impossible to export these settings to launch.json.
Separate `"rust-analyzer.newDebugConfig"` command looks better for me.
----
Fixes#4450Fixes#3441
Co-authored-by: vsrs <vit@conrlab.com>
Co-authored-by: vsrs <62505555+vsrs@users.noreply.github.com>
