```
error[E0412]: cannot find type `T` in this scope
--> file.rs:3:12
|
3 | impl Trait<T> for Struct {}
| - ^ not found in this scope
| |
| help: you might be missing a type parameter: `<T>`
```
Fix#64298.
This doesn't mention that using an existing lifetime is possible, but
that would hopefully be clear as always being an option. The intention
of this is to teach newcomers what the lifetime syntax is.
Clean up some diagnostics by making them more consistent
In general:
- Diagnostic should start with a lowercase letter.
- Diagnostics should not end with a full stop.
- Ellipses contain three dots.
- Backticks should encode Rust code.
I also reworded a couple of messages to make them read more clearly.
It might be sensible to create a style guide for diagnostics, so these informal conventions are written down somewhere, after which we could audit the existing diagnostics.
r? @Centril
Extract `rustc_hir` out of `rustc`
The new crate contains:
```rust
pub mod def;
pub mod def_id;
mod hir;
pub mod hir_id;
pub mod itemlikevisit;
pub mod pat_util;
pub mod print;
mod stable_hash_impls;
pub use hir::*;
pub use hir_id::*;
pub use stable_hash_impls::HashStableContext;
```
Remains to be done in follow-up PRs:
- Move `rustc::hir::map` into `rustc_hir_map` -- this has to be a separate crate due to the `dep_graph` (blocked on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/67761).
- Move references to `rustc::hir` to `rustc_hir` where possible.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65031
r? @Zoxc
Nix reexports from `rustc_span` in `syntax`
Remove reexports `syntax::{source_map, symbol, edition}` and use `rustc_span` paths directly.
r? @petrochenkov
Suggest calling method when first argument is `self`
Closes: #66782
I've explored different approaches for this MR but I think the most straightforward is the best one.
I've tried to find out if the methods for given type exist (to maybe have a better suggestion), but we don't collect them anywhere and collecting them is quite problematic. Moreover, collecting all the methods would require rewriting big part of the code and also could potentially include performance degradation, which I don't think is necessary for this simple case.
