7218: Fix typos r=Veykril a=regexident
Apart from the very last commit on this PR (which fixes a public type's name) all changes are non-breaking.
Co-authored-by: Vincent Esche <regexident@gmail.com>
After we started reporting progress when running cargo check during
loading, it is possible to crash the client with two identical progress
tokens.
This points to a deeper issue: we might be running several cargo checks
concurrently, which doesn't make sense.
This commit linearizes all workspace fetches, making sure no updates are
lost.
As an additional touch, it also normalizes progress & result reporting,
to make sure they stand in sync.
This leaks a lot of LSP details into ide layer, which we want to avoid:
c9cec381bc/docs/dev (lsp-independence)
Additionally, all what this infra does is providing a toggle for
auto-import completion, but we already have one!
Rather than eagerly converting JSON, we losslessly keep it as is, and
change the shape of user-submitted data at the last moment.
This also allows us to remove a bunch of wrong Defaults
7068: Add VSCode command to view the hir of a function body r=theotherphil a=theotherphil
Will fix https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/7061. Very rough initial version just to work out where I needed to wire everything up.
@matklad would you be happy merging a hir visualiser of some kind? If so, do you have any thoughts on what you'd like it show, and how?
I've spent very little time on this thus far, so I'm fine with throwing away the contents of this PR, but I want to avoid taking the time to make this more polished/interactive/useful only to discover that no-one else has any interest in this functionality.
Co-authored-by: Phil Ellison <phil.j.ellison@gmail.com>
7115: Migrate HasSource::source to return Option r=matklad a=nick96
I've made a start on fixing #6913 based on the provided work plan, migrating `HasSource::source` to return an `Option`. The simple cases are migrated but there are a few that I'm unsure exactly how they should be handled:
- Logging the processing of functions in `AnalysisStatsCmd::run`: In verbose mode it includes the path to the module containing the function and the syntax range. I've handled this with an if-let but would it be better to blow up here with `expect`? I'm not 100% on the code paths but if we're processing a function definition then the source should exist.
I've handled `source()` in all code paths as `None` being a valid return value but are there some cases where we should just blow up? Also, all I've done is bubble up the returned `None`s, there may be some places where we can recover and still provide something.
Co-authored-by: Nick Spain <nicholas.spain@stileeducation.com>
Co-authored-by: Nick Spain <nicholas.spain96@gmail.com>
