- Adds a new AstElement trait that is implemented by all generated
node, token and enum structs
- Overhauls the code generators to code-generate all tokens, and
also enhances enums to support including tokens, node, and nested
enums
The sytax tree output files now use .rast extension
(rust-analyzer syntax tree or rust abstract syntax tree
(whatever)).
This format has a editors/code/ra_syntax_tree.tmGrammar.json declaration
that supplies nice syntax highlighting for .rast files.
We treat macro calls as expressions (there's appropriate Into impl),
which causes problem if there's expresison and non-expression macro in
the same node (like in the match arm).
We fix this problem by nesting macor patterns into another node (the
same way we nest path into PathExpr or PathPat). Ideally, we probably
should add a similar nesting for macro expressions, but that needs
some careful thinking about macros in blocks: `{ am_i_expression!() }`.
3746: Add create_function assist r=flodiebold a=TimoFreiberg
The function part of #3639, creating methods will come later
- [X] Function arguments
- [X] Function call arguments
- [x] Method call arguments
- [x] Literal arguments
- [x] Variable reference arguments
- [X] Migrate to `ast::make` API
Done, but there are some ugly spots.
Issues to handle in another PR:
- function reference arguments: Their type isn't printed properly right now.
The "insert explicit type" assist has the same issue and this is probably a relatively rare usecase.
- generating proper names for all kinds of argument expressions (if, loop, ...?)
Without this, it's totally possible for the assist to generate invalid argument names.
I think the assist it's already helpful enough to be shipped as it is, at least for me the main usecase involves passing in named references.
Besides, the Rust tooling ecosystem is immature enough that some janky behaviour in a new assist probably won't scare anyone off.
- select the generated placeholder body so it's a bit easier to overwrite it
- create method (`self.foo<|>(..)` or `some_foo.foo<|>(..)`) instead of create_function.
The main difference would be finding (or creating) the impl block and inserting the `self` argument correctly
- more specific default arg names for literals.
So far, every generated argument whose name can't be taken from the call site is called `arg` (with a number suffix if necessary).
- creating functions in another module of the same crate.
E.g. when typing `some_mod::foo<|>(...)` when in `lib.rs`, I'd want to have `foo` generated in `some_mod.rs` and jump there.
Issues: the mod could exist in `some_mod.rs`, in `lib.rs` as `mod some_mod`, or inside another mod but be imported via `use other_mod::some_mod`.
- refer to arguments of the generated function with a qualified path if the types aren't imported yet
(alternative: run autoimport. i think starting with a qualified path is cleaner and there's already an assist to replace a qualified path with an import and an unqualified path)
- add type arguments of the arguments to the generated function
- Autocomplete functions with information from unresolved calls (see https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/3746#issuecomment-605281323)
Issues: see https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/3746#issuecomment-605282542. The unresolved call could be anywhere. But just offering this autocompletion for unresolved calls in the same module would already be cool.
Co-authored-by: Timo Freiberg <timo.freiberg@gmail.com>
3814: Add impl From for enum variant assist r=flodiebold a=mattyhall
Basically adds a From impl for tuple enum variants with one field. It was recommended to me on the zulip to maybe try using the trait solver, but I had trouble with that as, although it could resolve the trait impl, it couldn't resolve the variable unambiguously in real use. I'm also unsure of how it would work if there were already multiple From impls to resolve - I can't see a way we could get more than one solution to my query.
Fixes#3766
Co-authored-by: Matthew Hall <matthew@quickbeam.me.uk>
Basically adds a From impl for tuple enum variants with one field. Added
to cover the fairly common case of implementing your own Error that can
be created from another one, although other use cases exist.
This commit changes the parser to attach doc-comments to the corresponding declaration in case there are newlines in between the doc-comment and the declaration.
This introduces the new type -- Semantics.
Semantics maps SyntaxNodes to various semantic info, such as type,
name resolution or macro expansions.
To do so, Semantics maintains a HashMap which maps every node it saw
to the file from which the node originated. This is enough to get all
the necessary hir bits just from syntax.
3026: ra_syntax: reshape SyntaxError for the sake of removing redundancy r=matklad a=Veetaha
Followup of #2911, also puts some crosses to the todo list of #223.
**AHTUNG!** A big part of the diff of this PR are test data files changes.
Simplified `SyntaxError` that was `SyntaxError { kind: { /* big enum */ }, location: Location }` to `SyntaxError(String, TextRange)`. I am not sure whether the tuple struct here is best fit, I am inclined to add names to the fields, because I already provide getters `SyntaxError::message()`, `SyntaxError::range()`.
I also removed `Location` altogether ...
This is currently WIP, because the following is not done:
- [ ] ~~Add tests to `test_data` dir for unescape errors *// I don't know where to put these errors in particular, because they are out of the scope of the lexer and parser. However, I have an idea in mind that we move all validators we have right now to parsing stage, but this is up to discussion...*~~ **[UPD]** I came to a conclusion that tree validation logic, which unescape errors are a part of, should be rethought of, we currently have no tests and no place to put tests for tree validations. So I'd like to extract potential redesign (maybe move of tree validation to ra_parser) and adding tests for this into a separate task.
Co-authored-by: Veetaha <gerzoh1@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Veetaha <veetaha2@gmail.com>
3062: Implement slice pattern AST > HIR lowering r=jplatte a=jplatte
WIP. The necessary changes for parsing are implemented, but actual inference is not yet. Just wanted to upload what I've got so far so it doesn't get duplicated :)
Will fix#3043
Co-authored-by: Jonas Platte <jplatte+git@posteo.de>
3047: Update async unsafe fn ordering in parser r=matklad a=kiljacken
As of rust-lang/rust#61319 the correct order for functions that are both unsafe and async is: `async unsafe fn` and not `unsafe async fn`.
This commit updates the parser tests to reflect this, and corrects parsing behavior to accept the correct ordering.
Fixes#3025
Co-authored-by: Emil Lauridsen <mine809@gmail.com>
3040: Rework value parameter parsing r=matklad a=tobz1000
Fixes#2847.
- `Fn__(...)` parameters with idents/patterns no longer parse
- Trait function parameters with arbitrary patterns parse
- Trait function parameters without idents/patterns no longer parse
- `fn(...)` parameters no longer parse with patterns other than a single ident
__Question__: The pre-existing test `param_list_opt_patterns` has been kept as-is, although the name no longer makes sense (it's testing `Fn__(...)` params, which aren't allowed patterns any more). What would be best to do about this?
Co-authored-by: Toby Dimmick <tobydimmick@pm.me>
As of rust-lang/rust#61319 the correct order for functions that are both
unsafe and async is: `async unsafe fn` and not `unsafe async fn`.
This commit updates the parser tests to reflect this, and corrects
parsing behavior to accept the correct ordering.
Fixes#3025
- `Fn__(...)` parameters with idents/patterns no longer parse
- Trait function parameters with arbitrary patterns parse
- Trait function parameters without idents/patterns no longer parse
- `fn(...)` parameters no longer parse with patterns other than a single ident
2827: Fix array element attribute position r=matklad a=edwin0cheng
This PR fixed a bug which an ATTR node insert in the wrong place in array element. ~~And introduce `precede_next` for allow outer attributes to insert into a parsed `expr`.~~
related #2783
Co-authored-by: Edwin Cheng <edwin0cheng@gmail.com>
2837: Accidentally quadratic r=matklad a=matklad
Our syntax highlighting is accdentally quadratic. Current state of the PR fixes it in a pretty crude way, looks like for the proper fix we need to redo how source-analyzer works.
**NB:** don't be scared by diff stats, that's mostly a test-data file
Co-authored-by: Aleksey Kladov <aleksey.kladov@gmail.com>
2641: Parse const generics r=matklad a=roblabla
Adds very primitive support for parsing const generics (`const IDENT: TY`) so that rust-analyzer stops complaining about the syntax being invalid.
Fixes#1574Fixes#2281
Co-authored-by: roblabla <unfiltered@roblab.la>
2628: Add macro 2.0 support in parser r=matklad a=edwin0cheng
This PR added a new syntax kind : `MACRO_DEF` and a keyword `MACRO_KW`
there are two syntax for declarative macro 2.0 :
1. Normal : `macro m { ($i:ident) => {} }` , which handle similar to legacy one.
2. Call like: `macro m($i:ident) {}`, it produces a single token tree which have two child token trees : `($i:ident)` and `{}`
Co-authored-by: Edwin Cheng <edwin0cheng@gmail.com>
Although structs and unions have the same syntax and differ only in
the keyword, re-using the single syntax node for both of them leads to
confusion in practice, and propagates further down the hir in an
upleasent way.
Moreover, static and consts also share syntax, but we use different
nodes for them.
2343: implement assist invert_if r=matklad a=bravomikekilo
fix [issue 2219 invert if condition](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/2219)
I put the assist cursor range to `if` of the if expression, because both condition and body will be replaced. Is there any way to replace them without cover the cursor position?
@matklad
Co-authored-by: bravomikekilo <bmk1221@126.com>
The current system with AstIds has two primaraly drawbacks:
* It is possible to manufacture IDs out of thin air.
For example, it's possible to create IDs for items which are not
considered in CrateDefMap due to cfg. Or it is possible to mixup
structs and unions, because they share ID space.
* Getting the ID of a parent requires a secondary index.
Instead, the plan is to pursue the more traditional approach, where
each items stores the id of the parent declaration. This makes
`FromSource` more awkward, but also more correct: now, to get from an
AST to HIR, we first do this recursively for the parent item, and the
just search the children of the parent for the matching def
