internal: Follow rustfmt's algorithm for ordering imports when ordering and merging use trees
Updates use tree ordering and merging utilities to follow rustfmt's algorithm for ordering imports.
The [rustfmt implementation](6356fca675/src/imports.rs) was used as reference.
Show which roots are being scanned in progress messages
This changes the `Roots Scanned` message to include the directory being scanned.
Before: `Roots Scanned 206/210 (98%)`
After: `Roots Scanned 206/210: .direnv (98%)`
This makes it a lot easier to tell that `rust-analyzer` isn't crashed, it's just trying to scan a huge directory.
See: #12613
fix: Acknowledge `pub(crate)` imports in import suggestions
rust-analyzer has logic that discounts suggesting `use`s for private imports, but that logic is unnecessarily strict - for instance given this code:
```rust
mod foo {
pub struct Foo;
}
pub(crate) use self::foo::*;
mod bar {
fn main() {
Foo$0;
}
}
```
... RA will suggest to add `use crate::foo::Foo;`, which not only makes the code overly verbose (especially in larger code bases), but also is disjoint with what rustc itself suggests.
This commit adjusts the logic, so that `pub(crate)` imports are taken into account when generating the suggestions; considering rustc's behavior, I think this change doesn't warrant any extra configuration flag.
Note that this is my first commit to RA, so I guess the approach taken here might be suboptimal - certainly feels somewhat hacky, maybe there's some better way of finding out the optimal import path 😅
rust-analyzer has logic that discounts suggesting `use`s for private
imports, but that logic is unnecessarily strict - for instance given
this code:
```rust
mod foo {
pub struct Foo;
}
pub(crate) use self::foo::*;
mod bar {
fn main() {
Foo$0;
}
}
```
... RA will suggest to add `use crate::foo::Foo;`, which not only makes
the code overly verbose (especially in larger code bases), but also is
disjoint with what rustc itself suggests.
This commit adjusts the logic, so that `pub(crate)` imports are taken
into account when generating the suggestions; considering rustc's
behavior, I think this change doesn't warrant any extra configuration
flag.
Note that this is my first commit to RA, so I guess the approach taken
here might be suboptimal - certainly feels somewhat hacky, maybe there's
some better way of finding out the optimal import path 😅
minor: Mark unresolved associated item diagnostic as experimental
Per #16327 unresolved associated item has false positives. Mark the diagnostic as experimental until this is more dependable.
