Give `unmerge_use` a label explaining what it will affect.
When I'm trying to clean up `use`s, I often feel uncertain about what exactly the effects of choosing an assist will be. This PR makes a small improvement to that by giving “Unmerge use” a label which names the root of the tree that it's going to move, when one exists.
There is no test because I didn't see, among the test helpers, a way to assert on the assist label (as opposed to filtering on it). However, I did test the change manually.
I looked into making a similar change to “Merge imports”, but that is considerably trickier.
VSCode behaves strangely, allowing to navigate into label location, but
not allowing to apply hint's text edit, after hint is resolved.
See https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/issues/193124 for details.
For now, stub hint resolution for VSCode specifically.
Switch to in-tree rustc dependencies with a cfg flag
We can use this flag to detect and prevent breakages in rustc CI. (see #14846 and #15569)
~The `IN_RUSTC_REPOSITORY` is just a placeholder. Is there any existing cfg flag that rustc CI sets?~
fix: Don't skip closure captures after let-else
As I understand that `return` was left there by accident. It caused capture analysis to skip the rest of the block after a let-else, and then missed captures caused incorrect results in borrowck, closure hints, layout calculation, etc.
Fixes#15623
I didn't understand why I using the example from #15623 as-is doesn't work - I don't get the warnings unless I remove the `call_me()` call, even on the same commit as my own RA version which does show those warnings.
Field shorthand overwritten in promote local to const assist
Currently, running `promote_local_to_const` on the following:
```rust
struct Foo {
bar: usize,
}
fn main() {
let $0bar = 0;
let foo = Foo { bar };
}
```
Results in:
```rust
struct Foo {
bar: usize,
}
fn main() {
const BAR: usize = 0;
let foo = Foo { BAR };
}
```
But instead should be something like:
```rust
struct Foo {
bar: usize,
}
fn main() {
const BAR: usize = 0;
let foo = Foo { bar: BAR };
}
```
ide : Disallow renaming of non-local items
fixes#14850 . This makes me wonder , why stop at structs and not do the same for other ADTs? Would be happy to add them too if nothing speaks against it.
project-model: when using `rust-project.json`, prefer the sysroot-defined rustc over discovery in `$PATH`
At the moment, rust-analyzer discovers `rustc` via the `$PATH` even if the `sysroot` field is defined in a `rust-project.json`. However, this does not work for users who do not have rustup installed, resulting in any `cfg`-based inference in rust-analzyer not working correctly. In my (decently naive!) opinion, it makes more sense to rely on the `sysroot` field in the `rust-project.json`.
One might ask "why not add `rustc` to the `$PATH`?" That is a reasonable question, but that doesn't work for my use case:
- The path to the sysroot in my employer's monorepo changes depending on which platform a user is on. For example, if they're on Linux, they'd want to use the sysroot defined at path `a`, whereas if they're on macOS, they'd want to use the sysroot at path `b` (I wrote the sysroot resolution functionality [here](765da4ca1e/integrations/rust-project/src/sysroot.rs (L39)), if you're curious).
- The location of the sysroot can (and does!) change, especially as people figure out how to make Rust run successfully on non-Linux platforms (e.g., iOS, Android, etc.) in a monorepo. Updating people's `$PATH` company-wide is hard while updating a config inside a CLI is pretty easy.
## Testing
I've created a `rust-project.json` using [rust-project](https://github.com/facebook/buck2/tree/main/integrations/rust-project) and was able to successfully load a project with and without the `sysroot`/`sysroot_src` fields—without those fields, rust-analyzer fell back to the `$PATH` based approach, as evidenced by `[DEBUG project_model::rustc_cfg] using rustc from env rustc="rustc"` showing up in the logs.
