| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
fix(rustc_parse): correct span in `maybe_whole_expr!`
Fixes #87812
|
|
Cow'ify some pprust methods
Reduce number of potential needless de/allocations by using `Cow<'static, str>` instead of explicit `String` type.
|
|
Old error output:
3 | let _: usize = $f;
| ----- ^ expected `usize`, found struct `Baz`
| |
| expected due to this
New error output:
3 | let _: usize = $f;
| ----- ^^ expected `usize`, found struct `Baz`
| |
| expected due to this
|
|
Old error output:
= note: this warning originates in the macro `foo` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
help: wrap this expression in parentheses
|
4 | break '_l $f(;)
| ^ ^
New error output:
= note: this warning originates in the macro `foo` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
help: wrap this expression in parentheses
|
4 | break '_l ($f);
| ^ ^
|
|
reduce potential reallocations
|
|
|
|
|
|
expressions
|
|
* Use more accurate span for `async move` suggestion
* Use more accurate span for deref suggestion
* Use `multipart_suggestion` more often
|
|
Add diagnostics for mistyped inclusive range
Inclusive ranges are correctly typed as `..=`. However, it's quite easy to think of it as being like `==`, and type `..==` instead. This PR adds helpful diagnostics for this case.
Resolves #86395 (there are some other cases there, but I think those should probably have separate issues).
r? `@estebank`
|
|
Co-authored-by: Esteban Kuber <estebank@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
|
|
r=nikomatsakis
Re-add support for parsing (and pretty-printing) inner-attributes in match body
Re-add support for parsing (and pretty-printing) inner-attributes within body of a `match`.
In other words, we can do `match EXPR { #![inner_attr] ARM_1 ARM_2 ... }` again.
I believe this unbreaks the only four crates that crater flagged as broken by PR #83312.
(I am putting this up so that the lang-team can check it out and decide whether it changes their mind about what to do regarding PR #83312.)
|
|
|
|
position.
|
|
|
|
body of a `match`.
In other words, we can do `match EXPR { #![inner_attr] ARM_1 ARM_2 ... }` again.
I believe this unbreaks the only four crates that crater flagged as broken by PR 83312.
(I am putting this up so that the lang-team can check it out and decide whether
it changes their mind about what to do regarding PR 83312.)
|
|
|
|
This PR modifies the macro expansion infrastructure to handle attributes
in a fully token-based manner. As a result:
* Derives macros no longer lose spans when their input is modified
by eager cfg-expansion. This is accomplished by performing eager
cfg-expansion on the token stream that we pass to the derive
proc-macro
* Inner attributes now preserve spans in all cases, including when we
have multiple inner attributes in a row.
This is accomplished through the following changes:
* New structs `AttrAnnotatedTokenStream` and `AttrAnnotatedTokenTree` are introduced.
These are very similar to a normal `TokenTree`, but they also track
the position of attributes and attribute targets within the stream.
They are built when we collect tokens during parsing.
An `AttrAnnotatedTokenStream` is converted to a regular `TokenStream` when
we invoke a macro.
* Token capturing and `LazyTokenStream` are modified to work with
`AttrAnnotatedTokenStream`. A new `ReplaceRange` type is introduced, which
is created during the parsing of a nested AST node to make the 'outer'
AST node aware of the attributes and attribute target stored deeper in the token stream.
* When we need to perform eager cfg-expansion (either due to `#[derive]` or `#[cfg_eval]`),
we tokenize and reparse our target, capturing additional information about the locations of
`#[cfg]` and `#[cfg_attr]` attributes at any depth within the target.
This is a performance optimization, allowing us to perform less work
in the typical case where captured tokens never have eager cfg-expansion run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
StructField -> FieldDef ("field definition")
Field -> ExprField ("expression field", not "field expression")
FieldPat -> PatField ("pattern field", not "field pattern")
Also rename visiting and other methods working on them.
|
|
Fix #82524.
|
|
|
|
which would always return Ok(..)
|
|
avoid converting types into themselves (clippy::useless_conversion)
|
|
|
|
Along the way, we also implement a handful of diagnostics improvements
and fixes, particularly with respect to the special handling of `||` in
place of `|` and when there are leading verts in function params, which
don't allow top-level or-patterns anyway.
|
|
|
|
This is a pure refactoring split out from #80689.
It represents the most invasive part of that PR, requiring changes in
every caller of `parse_outer_attributes`
In order to eagerly expand `#[cfg]` attributes while preserving the
original `TokenStream`, we need to know the range of tokens that
corresponds to every attribute target. This is accomplished by making
`parse_outer_attributes` return an opaque `AttrWrapper` struct. An
`AttrWrapper` must be converted to a plain `AttrVec` by passing it to
`collect_tokens_trailing_token`. This makes it difficult to accidentally
construct an AST node with attributes without calling `collect_tokens_trailing_token`,
since AST nodes store an `AttrVec`, not an `AttrWrapper`.
As a result, we now call `collect_tokens_trailing_token` for attribute
targets which only support inert attributes, such as generic arguments
and struct fields. Currently, the constructed `LazyTokenStream` is
simply discarded. Future PRs will record the token range corresponding
to the attribute target, allowing those tokens to be removed from an
enclosing `collect_tokens_trailing_token` call if necessary.
|
|
When encountering the following typo:
```rust
a: loop { break 'a; }
```
provide an appropriate suggestion.
|
|
Fixes #81007
Previously, we would fail to collect tokens in the proper place when
only builtin attributes were present. As a result, we would end up with
attribute tokens in the collected `TokenStream`, leading to duplication
when we attempted to prepend the attributes from the AST node.
We now explicitly track when token collection must be performed due to
nomterminal parsing.
|
|
A new `HasTokens` trait is introduced, which is used to move logic from
the callers of `collect_tokens` into the body of `collect_tokens`.
In addition to reducing duplication, this paves the way for PR #80689,
which needs to perform additional logic during token collection.
|
|
Suggest async {} for async || {}
Fixes #76011
This adds support for adding help diagnostics to the feature gating checks and
then uses it for the async_closure gate to add the extra bit of help
information as described in the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implemented a compiler diagnostic for move async mistake
Fixes #79694
First time contributing, so I hope I'm doing everything right.
(If not, please correct me!)
This code performs a check when a move capture clause is parsed. The check is to detect if the user has reversed the async move keywords and to provide a diagnostic with a suggestion to fix it.
Checked code:
```rust
fn main() {
move async { };
}
```
Previous output:
```txt
PS C:\Repos\move_async_test> cargo build
Compiling move_async_test v0.1.0 (C:\Repos\move_async_test)
error: expected one of `|` or `||`, found keyword `async`
--> src\main.rs:2:10
|
2 | move async { };
| ^^^^^ expected one of `|` or `||`
error: aborting due to previous error
error: could not compile `move_async_test`
```
New output:
```txt
PS C:\Repos\move_async_test> cargo +dev build
Compiling move_async_test v0.1.0 (C:\Repos\move_async_test)
error: the order of `move` and `async` is incorrect
--> src\main.rs:2:13
|
2 | let _ = move async { };
| ^^^^^^^^^^
|
help: try switching the order
|
2 | let _ = async move { };
| ^^^^^^^^^^
error: aborting due to previous error
error: could not compile `move_async_test`
```
Is there a file/module where these kind of things are tested?
Would love some feedback 😄
|
|
Ran the tidy check
Following the diagnostic guide better
Diagnostic generation is now relegated to its own function in the diagnostics module.
Added tests
Fixed the ui test
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example, `1` is parsed as an integer literal, but it can be turned
into a float with the suffix `f32`. Now the error calls them "numeric
literals" and notes that you can add a float suffix since they can be
either integers or floats.
|
|
Co-authored-by: varkor <github@varkor.com>
|
|
Co-authored-by: varkor <github@varkor.com>
|
|
|
|
r=petrochenkov
Suggest that expressions that look like const generic arguments should be enclosed in brackets
I pulled out the changes for const expressions from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/71592 (without the trait object diagnostic changes) and made some small changes; the implementation is `@estebank's.`
We're also going to want to make some changes separately to account for trait objects (they result in poor diagnostics, as is evident from one of the test cases here), such as an adaption of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/72273.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/70753.
r? `@petrochenkov`
|
|
enclosed in brackets
Co-Authored-By: Esteban Kuber <github@kuber.com.ar>
|
|
Unconditionally capture tokens for attributes.
This allows us to avoid synthesizing tokens in `prepend_attr`, since we
have the original tokens available.
We still need to synthesize tokens when expanding `cfg_attr`,
but this is an unavoidable consequence of the syntax of `cfg_attr` -
the user does not supply the `#` and `[]` tokens that a `cfg_attr`
expands to.
This is based on PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/77250 - this PR exposes a bug in the current `collect_tokens` implementation, which is fixed by the rewrite.
|
