In code like this:
```rust
impl<T> Option<T> {
fn as_deref(&self) -> T::Target where T: Deref {}
}
```
when trying to resolve the associated type `T::Target`, we were only
looking at the bounds on the impl (where the type parameter is defined),
but the method can add additional bounds that can also be used to refer
to associated types. Hence, when resolving such an associated type, it's
not enough to just know the type parameter T, we also need to know
exactly where we are currently.
This fixes#11364 (beta apparently switched some bounds around).
11145: feat: add config to use reasonable default expression instead of todo! when filling missing fields r=Veykril a=bnjjj
Use `Default::default()` in struct fields when we ask to fill it instead of putting `todo!()` for every fields
before:
```rust
pub enum Other {
One,
Two,
}
pub struct Test {
text: String,
num: usize,
other: Other,
}
fn t_test() {
let test = Test {<|>};
}
```
after:
```rust
pub enum Other {
One,
Two,
}
pub struct Test {
text: String,
num: usize,
other: Other,
}
fn t_test() {
let test = Test {
text: String::new(),
num: 0,
other: todo!(),
};
}
```
Co-authored-by: Benjamin Coenen <5719034+bnjjj@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Coenen Benjamin <benjamin.coenen@hotmail.com>
10872: ide_db: build symbol index from crate def map r=Veykril a=jhgg
fixes#4842, #10764
Is this looking correct? 👀
- [x] build the symbol index based upon the CrateDefMap for the given crate in `crate_symbols`
- [x] make it multi threaded again, and figure out how to cache each moduleid's symbol index in salsa.
- [x] NavigationTarget for names in macros is wrong, need to figure out how to compute a text range in the original file id?
- [x] cleanup some duped code
- [x] collect macros from `ItemScope.declared_macros()` into symbol index.
- [x] store declared macros in `ItemScope` so we can figure out where macros were defined for the index.
- [x] do something about `SymbolIndex::for_files` - ideally it should use the new module symbol index stuff.
- [x] delete `source_file_to_file_symbols` & co...
- [x] figure out what to do about `library_symbols`
- [x] maybe... speed up the new `library_symbols` - the new impl is probably much slower, and definitely much less parallel. **deciding to do nothing here, we can optimize later if necerssary.**
- [x] fix failing test: `navigation_target::tests::test_nav_for_symbol` - notably the crate def map doesn't seem to find declarations inside function.
- [x] now a bunch of other tests are failing around auto_import & qualify_path handlers. :(
- [x] need to assoc items in traits and impls
Co-authored-by: Jake Heinz <jh@discordapp.com>
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
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>
9734: semantic highlighting: add reference hlmod r=matklad a=jhgg
This PR adds the "reference" highlight modifier!
I basically went around and looked for `HlMod::Mutable` to find the callsites to add a reference. I think these all make sense!
Co-authored-by: Jake Heinz <jh@discordapp.com>
Co-authored-by: Jake <jh@discordapp.com>
9637: Overhaul doc_links testing infra r=Veykril a=Veykril
and fix several issues with current implementation.
Fixes#9617
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
Definition::visibility was implemented in a rather roundabout way -- by
asking the parent module about the effective visibility.
This is problematic for a couple of reasons:
* first, it doesn't work for local items
* second, asking module about visibility of a child is a linear
operation (that's a problem in itself, tracked in #9378)
Instead, lets ask the declared visibility directly, we have all the code
for it, and need only to actually us it.
The completion of cfg will look at the enabled cfg keys when
performing completion.
It will also look crate features when completing a feature cfg
option. A fixed list of known values for some cfg options are
provided.
For unknown keys it will look at the enabled values for that cfg key,
which means that completion will only show enabled options for those.
9260: tree-wide: make rustdoc links spiky so they are clickable r=matklad a=lf-
Rustdoc was complaining about these while I was running with --document-private-items and I figure they should be fixed.
Co-authored-by: Jade <software@lfcode.ca>
At the moment, this moves only a single diagnostic, but the idea is
reafactor the rest to use the same pattern. We are going to have a
single file per diagnostic. This file will define diagnostics code,
rendering range and fixes, if any. It'll also have all of the tests.
This is similar to how we deal with assists.
After we refactor all diagnostics to follow this pattern, we'll probably
move them to a new `ide_diagnostics` crate.
Not that we intentionally want to test all diagnostics on this layer,
despite the fact that they are generally emitted in the guts on the
compiler. Diagnostics care to much about the end presentation
details/fixes to be worth-while "unit" testing. So, we'll unit-test only
the primary output of compilation process (types and name res tables),
and will use integrated UI tests for diagnostics.
9181: Don't complete values in type position r=jonas-schievink a=Veykril
Will add some proper tests in a bit
9182: fix: don't complete derive macros as fn-like macros r=jonas-schievink a=jonas-schievink
Part of https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/8518
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonasschievink@gmail.com>
9169: internal: steps towards attribute macro token mapping r=jonas-schievink a=jonas-schievink
This doesn't work yet, but we seem to be getting a bit further along (for example, we now stop highlighting `use` items inside item with attribute macros as if they were written verbatim).
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonasschievink@gmail.com>
e.g. if you have a trait T and `impl T for S` for some struct, if you
goto definition on some function name inside the impl, it will go to the
definition of that function inside the `trait T` block, rather than the
current behaviour of not going anywhere at all.
8866: Update salsa r=matklad a=jonas-schievink
This updates salsa to include https://github.com/salsa-rs/salsa/pull/265, and removes all cancellation-related code from rust-analyzer
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonasschievink@gmail.com>
8997: internal: stop expanding UseTrees during ItemTree lowering r=jonas-schievink a=jonas-schievink
Closes https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/8908
Messy diff, but `ItemTree` lowering got simpler, since we now have a strict 1-to-1 mapping between `ast::Item` and `ModItem`.
The most messy part is mapping a single `UseTree` back to its `ast::UseTree` counterpart for diagnostics, but I think the ad-hoc source map built during lowering does the job.
Co-authored-by: Jonas Schievink <jonasschievink@gmail.com>
The idea here is to eventually get rid of `dyn Diagnostic` and
`DiagnosticSink` infrastructure altogether, and just have a `enum
hir::Diagnostic` instead.
The problem with `dyn Diagnostic` is that it is defined in the lowest
level of the stack (hir_expand), but is used by the highest level (ide).
As a first step, we free hir_expand and hir_def from `dyn Diagnostic`
and kick the can up to `hir_ty`, as an intermediate state. The plan is
then to move DiagnosticSink similarly to the hir crate, and, as final
third step, remove its usage from the ide.
One currently unsolved problem is testing. You can notice that the test
which checks precise diagnostic ranges, unresolved_import_in_use_tree,
was moved to the ide layer. Logically, only IDE should have the infra to
render a specific range.
At the same time, the range is determined with the data produced in
hir_def and hir crates, so this layering is rather unfortunate. Working
on hir_def shouldn't require compiling `ide` for testing.
8942: Add `library` semantic token modifier to items from other crates r=arzg a=arzg
Closes#5772.
A lot of code here is pretty repetitive; please let me know if you have any ideas how to improve it, or whether it’s fine as-is.
Side-note: How can I add tests for this? I don’t see a way for the test Rust code in `test_highlighting` to reference other crates to observe the new behaviour.
Co-authored-by: Aramis Razzaghipour <aramisnoah@gmail.com>
