Distinguish between
- there is no build data (for some reason?)
- there is build data, but the cargo package didn't build a proc macro dylib
- there is a proc macro dylib, but it didn't contain the proc macro we expected
- the name did not resolve to any macro (this is now an
unresolved_macro_call even for attributes)
I changed the handling of disabled attribute macro expansion to
immediately ignore the macro and report an unresolved_proc_macro,
because otherwise they would now result in loud unresolved_macro_call
errors. I hope this doesn't break anything.
Also try to improve error ranges for unresolved_macro_call / macro_error
by reusing the code for unresolved_proc_macro. It's not perfect but
probably better than before.
11598: feat: Parse destructuring assignment r=Veykril a=ChayimFriedman2
Part of #11532.
Lowering is not as easy and may not even be feasible right now as it requires generating identifiers: `(a, b) = (b, a)` is desugared into
```rust
{
let (<gensym_a>, <gensym_b>) = (b, a);
a = <gensym_a>;
b = <gensym_b>;
}
```
rustc uses hygiene to implement that, but we don't support hygiene yet.
However, I think parsing was the main problem as lowering will just affect type inference, and while `{unknown}` is not nice it's much better than a syntax error.
I'm still looking for the best way to do lowering, though.
Fixes#11454.
Co-authored-by: Chayim Refael Friedman <chayimfr@gmail.com>
11444: feat: Fix up syntax errors in attribute macro inputs to make completion work more often r=flodiebold a=flodiebold
This implements the "fix up syntax nodes" workaround mentioned in #11014. It isn't much more than a proof of concept; I have only implemented a few cases, but it already helps quite a bit.
Some notes:
- I'm not super happy about how much the fixup procedure needs to interact with the syntax node -> token tree conversion code (e.g. needing to share the token map). This could maybe be simplified with some refactoring of that code.
- It would maybe be nice to have the fixup procedure reuse or share information with the parser, though I'm not really sure how much that would actually help.
Co-authored-by: Florian Diebold <flodiebold@gmail.com>
11281: ide: parallel prime caches r=jonas-schievink a=jhgg
cache priming goes brrrr... the successor to #10149
---
this PR implements a parallel cache priming strategy that uses a topological work queue to feed a pool of worker threads the crates to index in parallel.
## todo
- [x] should we keep the old prime caches?
- [x] we should use num_cpus to detect how many cpus to use to prime caches. should we also expose a config for # of worker CPU threads to use?
- [x] something is wonky with cancellation, need to figure it out before this can merge.
Co-authored-by: Jake Heinz <jh@discordapp.com>
10956: minor: Bump deps r=Veykril a=lnicola
bors r+
10986: fix: Fix lint completions not working for unclosed attributes r=Veykril a=Veykril
Fixes#10682
Uses keywords and nested `TokenTree`s as a heuristic to figure out when to stop parsing in case the attribute is unclosed which should work pretty well as attributes are usually followed by either of those.
bors r+
Co-authored-by: Laurențiu Nicola <lnicola@dend.ro>
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
10877: feat: make hightlighting linear r=matklad a=matklad
In https://youtu.be/qvIZZf5dmTE, we've noticed that AstIdMap does a
linear lookup when going from SyntaxNode to Id. This leads to
accidentally quadratic overall performance. Replace linear lookup with a
O(1) hashmap lookup.
Future work: don't duplicate `SyntaxNodePtr` in `AstIdMap` and switch to
"call site dependency injection" style storage (eg, store a
`HashSet<ErasedFileAstId>`).
See the explanation of the work here on YouTube :-)
As you can see from then benchmark results, this doesn't actually make analysis stats fastre. I am a bit mystified as to why this is happening to be honest.
Baseline
```
Database loaded: 598.40ms, 304minstr, 118mb (metadata 390.57ms, 21minstr, 841kb; build 111.31ms, 8764kinstr, -214kb)
crates: 39, mods: 824, decls: 18647, fns: 13910
Item Collection: 9.70s, 75ginstr, 377mb
exprs: 382426, ??ty: 387 (0%), ?ty: 285 (0%), !ty: 145
Inference: 43.16s, 342ginstr, 641mb
Total: 52.86s, 417ginstr, 1018mb
```
This PR:
```
Database loaded: 626.34ms, 304minstr, 118mb (metadata 416.26ms, 21minstr, 841kb; build 113.67ms, 8750kinstr, -209kb)
crates: 39, mods: 824, decls: 18647, fns: 13910
Item Collection: 10.16s, 75ginstr, 389mb
exprs: 382426, ??ty: 387 (0%), ?ty: 285 (0%), !ty: 145
Inference: 44.51s, 342ginstr, 644mb
Total: 54.67s, 417ginstr, 1034mb
```
I think we probably should merge the first commit here, but not the second.
Co-authored-by: Aleksey Kladov <aleksey.kladov@gmail.com>
10387: Move `IdxRange` into la-arena r=Veykril a=arzg
Currently, `IdxRange` (named `IdRange`) is located in `hir_def::item_tree`, when really it isn’t specific to `hir_def` and could become part of la-arena. The rename from `IdRange` to `IdxRange` is to maintain consistency with the naming convention used throughout la-arena (`Idx` instead of `Id`, `RawIdx` instead of `RawId`). This PR also adds a few new APIs to la-arena on top of `IdxRange` for convenience, namely:
- indexing into an `Arena` by an `IdxRange` and getting a slice of values back
- creating an `IdxRange` from an inclusive range
Currently this PR also exposes a new `Arena::next_idx` method to make constructing inclusive`IdxRange`s using `IdxRange::new` easier; however, it would in my opinion be better to remove this as it allows for easy creation of out-of-bounds `Idx`s, when `IdxRange::new_inclusive` mostly covers the same use-case while being less error-prone.
I decided to bump the la-arena version to 0.3.0 from 0.2.0 because adding a new `Index` impl for `Arena` turned out to be a breaking change: I had to add a type hint in `crates/hir_def/src/body/scope.rs` when one wasn’t necessary before, since rustc couldn’t work out the type of a closure parameter now that there are multiple `Index` impls. I’m not sure whether this is the right decision, though.
Co-authored-by: Aramis Razzaghipour <aramisnoah@gmail.com>
This addreses
https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/10464.
This patch picks up `lsp-types` 0.90.1, which serialises the
`SignatureInformation` and `ParameterInformation` with the right casing.
It also adds `activeSignature` field as part of the top-level signature
response. It keeps `activeParameter` at the top-level for backwards
compatibility.
10181: Begining of lsif r=HKalbasi a=HKalbasi
This PR adds a `lsif` command to cli, which can be used as `rust-analyzer lsif /path/to/project > dump.lsif`. It now generates a valid, but pretty useless lsif (only supports folding ranges). The propose of this PR is to discussing about the structure of lsif generator, before starting anything serious.
cc `@matklad` #8696#3098
Co-authored-by: hamidreza kalbasi <hamidrezakalbasi@protonmail.com>
Consider these expples
{ 92 }
async { 92 }
'a: { 92 }
#[a] { 92 }
Previously the tree for them were
BLOCK_EXPR
{ ... }
EFFECT_EXPR
async
BLOCK_EXPR
{ ... }
EFFECT_EXPR
'a:
BLOCK_EXPR
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
#[a]
{ ... }
As you see, it gets progressively worse :) The last two items are
especially odd. The last one even violates the balanced curleys
invariant we have (#10357) The new approach is to say that the stuff in
`{}` is stmt_list, and the block is stmt_list + optional modifiers
BLOCK_EXPR
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
async
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
'a:
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
BLOCK_EXPR
#[a]
STMT_LIST
{ ... }
FragmentKind played two roles:
* entry point to the parser
* syntactic category of a macro call
These are different use-cases, and warrant different types. For example,
macro can't expand to visibility, but we have such fragment today.
This PR introduces `ExpandsTo` enum to separate this two use-cases.
I suspect we might further split `FragmentKind` into `$x:specifier` enum
specific to MBE, and a general parser entry point, but that's for
another PR!
10066: internal: improve compile times a bit r=matklad a=matklad
I wanted to *quickly* remove `smol_str = {features = "serde"}`, and figured out that the simplest way to do that is to replace our straightforward proc macro serialization with something significantly more obscure.
Co-authored-by: Aleksey Kladov <aleksey.kladov@gmail.com>
This pulls in https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rowan/pull/111, which
fixes a bug in green node hash, making it more efficient.
On analysis stats, total memory goes from 1271mb to 1244mb, instructions
from 358ginstr to 353ginstr (not 100% clear on this one -- for some
reasons instruction counts are not stable for me anymore).
The counts are (before, than after):
rowan::green::node::GreenNode 11_490_596 2_357_063 2_233_347
rowan::green::token::GreenToken 5_010_401 994_281 991_920
rowan::green::node::GreenNode 9_738_085 1_988_164 1_890_549
rowan::green::token::GreenToken 3_353_409 687_333 685_831
total max_live live
I don't think there's anything wrong with project_model depending on
proc_macro_api directly -- fundamentally, both are about gluing our pure
data model to the messy outside world.
However, it's easy enough to avoid the dependency, so why not.
As an additional consideration, `proc_macro_api` now pulls in `base_db`.
project_model should definitely not depend on that!
