Add more methods for resolving definitions from AST to their corresponding HIR types
In order to be able to add these methods with consistent naming I had to also rename two existing methods that would otherwise be conflicting/confusing:
`Semantics::to_module_def(&self, file: FileId) -> Option<Module>` (before)
`Semantics::file_to_module_def(&self, file: FileId) -> Option<Module>` (after)
`Semantics::to_module_defs(&self, file: FileId) -> impl Iterator<Item = Module>` (before)
`Semantics::file_to_module_defs(&self, file: FileId) -> impl Iterator<Item = Module>` (after)
(the PR is motivated by an outside use of the `ra_ap_hir` crate that would benefit from being able to walk a `hir::Function`'s AST, resolving its exprs/stmts/items to their HIR equivalents)
fix: use 4 spaces for indentation in macro expansion
Partial fix for #16471.
In the previous code, the indentation produced by macro expansion was set to 2 spaces. This PR modifies it to 4 spaces for the sake of consistency.
performance: Speed up Method Completions By Taking Advantage of Orphan Rules
(Continues https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/pull/16498)
This PR speeds up method completions by doing two things without regressing `analysis-stats`[^1]:
- Filter candidate traits prior to calling `iterate_path_candidates` by relying on orphan rules (see below for a slightly more in-depth explanation). When generating completions [on `slog::Logger`](5e9e59c312/common/src/ledger.rs (L78)) in `oxidecomputer/omicron` as a test, this PR halved my completion times—it's now 454ms cold and 281ms warm. Before this PR, it was 808ms cold and 579ms warm.
- Inline some of the method candidate checks into `is_valid_method_candidate` and remove some unnecessary visibility checks. This was suggested by `@Veykril` in [this comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/pull/16498#issuecomment-1929864427).
We filter candidate traits by taking advantage of orphan rules. For additional details, I'll rely on `@WaffleLapkin's` explanation [from Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/185405-t-compiler.2Frust-analyzer/topic/Trait.20Checking/near/420942417):
> A type `A` can only implements traits which
> 1. Have a blanket implementation (`impl<T> Trait for T {}`)
> 2. Have implementation for `A` (`impl Trait for A {}`)
>
> Blanket implementation can only exist in `Trait`'s crate. Implementation for `A` can only exist in `A`'s or `Trait`'s crate.
Big thanks to Waffle for its keen observation!
---
I think some additional improvements are possible:
- `for_trait_and_self_ty` seemingly does not distinguish between `&T`, `&mut T`, or `T`, resulting in seemingly irrelevant traits like `tokio::io::AsyncWrite` being being included for, e.g., `&slog::Logger`. I don't know they're being considered due to the [autoref/autoderef behavior](a02a219773/crates/hir-ty/src/method_resolution.rs (L945-L962)), but I wonder if it'd make sense to filter by mutability earlier and not consider trait implementations that require `&mut T` when we only have a `&T`.
- The method completions [spend a _lot_ of time in unification](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/185405-t-compiler.2Frust-analyzer/topic/Trait.20Checking/near/421072356), and while there might be low-hanging fruit there, it might make more sense to wait for the new trait solver in `rustc`. I dunno.
[^1]: The filtering occurs outside of typechecking, after all.
Setup infra for handling auto trait bounds disabled due to perf problems
This patch updates some of the partially-implemented functions of `ChalkContext as RustIrDatabase`, namely `adt_datum()` and `impl_provided_for()`. With those, we can now correctly work with auto trait bounds and distinguish methods based on them.
Resolves#7856 (the second code; the first one is resolved by #13074)
**IMPORTANT**: I don't think we want to merge this until #7637 is resolved. Currently this patch introduces A LOT of unknown types and type mismtaches as shown below. This is because we cannot resolve items like `hashbrown::HashMap` in `std` modules, leading to auto trait bounds on them and their dependents unprovable.
|crate (from `rustc-perf@c52ee6` except for r-a)|e3dc5a588f07d6f1d3a0f33051d4af26190abe9e|HEAD of this branch|
|---|---|---|
|rust-analyzer @ e3dc5a588f |exprs: 417528, ??ty: 907 (0%), ?ty: 114 (0%), !ty: 1|exprs: 417528, ??ty: 1704 (0%), ?ty: 403 (0%), !ty: 20|
|ripgrep|exprs: 62120, ??ty: 2 (0%), ?ty: 0 (0%), !ty: 0|exprs: 62120, ??ty: 132 (0%), ?ty: 58 (0%), !ty: 11|
|webrender/webrender|exprs: 94355, ??ty: 49 (0%), ?ty: 16 (0%), !ty: 2|exprs: 94355, ??ty: 429 (0%), ?ty: 130 (0%), !ty: 7|
|diesel|exprs: 132591, ??ty: 401 (0%), ?ty: 5129 (3%), !ty: 31|exprs: 132591, ??ty: 401 (0%), ?ty: 5129 (3%), !ty: 31|
Abstract more over ItemTreeLoc-like structs
Allows reducing some code duplication by using functions generic over said structs. The diff isn't negative due to me adding some additional impls for completeness.
internal: even more `tracing`
As part of profiling completions, I added some additional spans and moved `TyBuilder::subst_for_def` closer to its usage site (the latter had a small impact on completion performance. Thanks for the tip, Lukas!)
