11445: Upstream inlay hints r=lnicola a=lnicola
Closes https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/2797
Closes https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/3394 (since now resolve the hints for the range given only, not for the whole document. We don't actually resolve anything due to [hard requirement](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/11445#issuecomment-1035227434) on label being immutable. Any further heavy actions could go to the `resolve` method that's now available via the official Code API for hints)
Based on `@SomeoneToIgnore's` branch, with a couple of updates:
- I squashed, more or less successfully, the commits on that branch
- downloading the `.d.ts` no longer works, but you can get it manually from https://raw.githubusercontent.com/microsoft/vscode/release/1.64/src/vscode-dts/vscode.proposed.inlayHints.d.ts
- you might need to pass `--enable-proposed-api matklad.rust-analyzer`
- if I'm reading the definition right, `InlayHintKind` needs to be serialized as a number, not string
- this doesn't work anyway -- the client-side gets the hints, but they don't display
Co-authored-by: Kirill Bulatov <mail4score@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Laurențiu Nicola <lnicola@dend.ro>
11424: Pass required features to cargo when using run action r=Veykril a=WaffleLapkin
When using `F1`->`Rust Analyzer: Run` action on an `example`, pass its `required-features` to `cargo run`. This allows to run examples that were otherwise impossible to run with RA.
Co-authored-by: Maybe Waffle <waffle.lapkin@gmail.com>
When using `F1`->`Rust Analyzer: Run` action on an `example`, pass its
`required-features` to `cargo run`. This allows to run examples that
were otherwise impossible to run with RA.
11182: fix: don't panic on seeing an unexpected offset r=Veykril a=dimbleby
Intended as a fix, or at least a sticking plaster, for #11081.
I have arranged that [offset()](1ba9a924d7/crates/ide_db/src/line_index.rs (L105-L107)) returns `Option<TextSize>` instead of going out of bounds; other changes are the result of following the compiler after doing this.
Perhaps there's still an issue here - I suppose the server and client have gotten out of sync and that probably shouldn't happen in the first place? I see that https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/10138#issuecomment-913727554 suggests what sounds like a more substantial fix which I think might be aimed in this direction. So perhaps that one should be left open to cover such things?
Meanwhile, I hope that not-crashing is a good improvement: and I can confirm that it works out just fine in the repro I have at #11081.
Co-authored-by: David Hotham <david.hotham@metaswitch.com>
