3806: lower bool literal value r=flodiebold a=JoshMcguigan
Following up on #3805, this PR adds the literal value to `ast::LiteralKind` so when we lower we can use the actual value from the source code rather than the default value for the type. Ultimately I plan to use this for exhaustiveness checking in #3706.
I didn't include this in the previous PR because I wasn't sure if it made sense to add this information to `ast::LiteralKind` or provide some other mechanism to get this from `ast::Literal`.
For now I've only implemented this for boolean literals, but I think it could be easily extended to other types. A possible exception to this are string literals, since we may not want to clone around an owned string to hold onto in `ast::LiteralKind`, and it'd be nice to avoid adding a generic lifetime as well. Perhaps we won't ever care about the actual value of a string literal?
Co-authored-by: Josh Mcguigan <joshmcg88@gmail.com>
3797: Don't show chaining hints for record literals and unit structs r=matklad a=lnicola
Fixes#3796
r? @Veetaha
Co-authored-by: Laurențiu Nicola <lnicola@dend.ro>
3805: lower literal patterns r=JoshMcguigan a=JoshMcguigan
While working on #3706 I discovered literal patterns weren't being lowered. This PR implements that lowering.
Questions for reviewers:
1. This re-uses the existing conversion from `ast::LiteralKind` to `Literal`, but `ast::LiteralKind` doesn't include information about the actual value of the literal, which causes `Literal` to be created with the default value for the type (rather than the actual value in the source code). Am I correct in thinking that we'd eventually want to change things in such a way that we could initialize the `Literal` with the actual literal value? Is there an existing issue for this, or else perhaps I should create one to discuss how it should be implemented? My main question would be whether `ast::LiteralKind` should be extended to hold the actual value, or if we should provide some other way to get that information from `ast::Literal`?
2. I couldn't find tests which directly cover this, but it does seem to work in #3706. Do we have unit tests for this lowering code?
3. I'm not sure why `lit.literal()` returns an `Option`. Is returning a `Pat::Missing` in the `None` case the right thing to do?
4. I was basically practicing type-system driven development to figure out the transformation from `ast::Pat::LiteralPat` to `Pat::Lit`. I don't have an immediate question here, but I just wanted to ensure this section is looked at closely during review.
Co-authored-by: Josh Mcguigan <joshmcg88@gmail.com>
3780: Simplify r=matklad a=Veetaha
I absolutely love tha fact that removing `.clone()` simplifies the code comparing to other languages where it's actually the contrary (ahem ~~`std::move()`~~)
3787: vscode: add syntax tree inspection hovers and highlights r=matklad a=Veetaha
I implemented the reverse mapping (when you hover in the rust editor), but it seems overcomplicated, so I removed it
Related #3682
Co-authored-by: veetaha <veetaha2@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Veetaha <veetaha2@gmail.com>
