The cast expression expected any type via types::type_() function,
but the language spec does only allow TypeNoBounds (types without direct extra bounds
via `+`).
**Example:**
```rust
fn test() {
6i8 as i32 + 5;
}
```
This fails, because the types::type_() function which should parse the type after the
as keyword is greedy, and takes all plus sign after path types as extra.
My proposed fix is to replace the not implemented `type_no_plus()` just calls (`type_()`)
function, which is used at several places. The replacement is `type_with_bounds_cond(p: &mut Parser, allow_bounds: bool)`, which passes the condition to relevant sub-parsers.
This function is then called by `type_()` and the new public `type_no_bounds()`.
256: Improve/add use_item documentation r=matklad a=DJMcNab
Adds some documentation to use_item explaining all code paths (use imports are hard, especially with the ongoing discussion of anchored v. uniform paths - see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/55618 for what appears to be the latest developments)
Co-authored-by: DJMcNab <36049421+djmcnab@users.noreply.github.com>
207: Finish implementing char validation r=aochagavia a=aochagavia
The only thing missing right now are good integration tests (and maybe more descriptive error messages)
Co-authored-by: Adolfo Ochagavía <github@adolfo.ochagavia.xyz>
127: Improve folding r=matklad a=aochagavia
I was messing around with adding support for multiline comments in folding and ended up changing a bunch of other things.
First of all, I am not convinced of folding groups of successive items. For instance, I don't see why it is worthwhile to be able to fold something like the following:
```rust
use foo;
use bar;
```
Furthermore, this causes problems if you want to fold a multiline import:
```rust
use foo::{
quux
};
use bar;
```
The problem is that now there are two possible folds at the same position: we could fold the first use or we could fold the import group. IMO, the only place where folding groups makes sense is when folding comments. Therefore I have **removed folding import groups in favor of folding multiline imports**.
Regarding folding comments, I made it a bit more robust by requiring that comments can only be folded if they have the same flavor. So if you have a bunch of `//` comments followed by `//!` comments, you will get two separate fold groups instead of a single one.
Finally, I rewrote the API in such a way that it should be trivial to add new folds. You only need to:
* Create a new FoldKind
* Add it to the `fold_kind` function that converts from `SyntaxKind` to `FoldKind`
Fixes#113
Co-authored-by: Adolfo Ochagavía <github@adolfo.ochagavia.xyz>
Implements a pretty barebones function signature help mechanism in
the language server.
Users can use `Analysis::resolve_callback()` to get basic information
about a call site.
Fixes#102
116: Collapse comments upon join r=matklad a=aochagavia
Todo:
- [x] Write tests
- [x] Resolve fixmes
- [x] Implement `comment_start_length` using the parser
I left a bunch of questions as fixmes. Can someone take a look at them? Also, I would love to use the parser to calculate the length of the leading characters in a comment (`//`, `///`, `//!`, `/*`), so any hints are greatly appreciated.
Co-authored-by: Adolfo Ochagavía <aochagavia92@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Adolfo Ochagavía <github@adolfo.ochagavia.xyz>
93: Support leading pipe in match arms r=matklad a=DJMcNab
This adds support for match arms of the form:
```rust
<...>
| X | Y => <...>,
| X => <...>,
| 1..2 => <...>,
etc
```
# Implementation discussion
This just naïvely 'eats' a leading pipe if one is available. The equivalent line in the reference `libsyntax` is in [`parse_arm`](441519536c/src/libsyntax/parse/parser.rs (L3552)).
As noted in the comment linked above, this feature was formally introduced as a result of rust-lang/rfcs#1925. This feature is in active use in the [`rust-analyzer` codebase](c87fcb4ea5/crates/ra_syntax/src/syntax_kinds/generated.rs (L231))
I have added some tests for this feature, but maybe more would be required
EDIT: Always looking for feedback - is this PR description over-engineered?
Co-authored-by: Daniel McNab <36049421+djmcnab@users.noreply.github.com>
