| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Point at unclosed delimiters as part of the primary MultiSpan
Both the place where the parser encounters a needed closed delimiter and
the unclosed opening delimiter are important, so they should get the
same level of highlighting in the output.
_Context: https://twitter.com/mwk4/status/1430631546432675840_
|
|
Improve errors for recursive type aliases
Fixes #17539.
|
|
|
|
Both the place where the parser encounters a needed closed delimiter and
the unclosed opening delimiter are important, so they should get the
same level of highlighting in the output.
|
|
|
|
* On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format
* When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline
* Color highlight modified span
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fix use placement for suggestions near main.
This fixes an edge case for the suggestion to add a `use`. When running with `--test`, the `main` function will be annotated with an `#[allow(dead_code)]` attribute. The `UsePlacementFinder` would end up using the dummy span of that synthetic attribute. If there are top-level inner attributes, this would place the `use` in the wrong position. The solution here is to ignore attributes with dummy spans.
In the process of working on this, I discovered that the `use_suggestion_placement` test was broken. `UsePlacementFinder` is unaware of active attributes. Attributes like `#[derive]` don't exist in the AST since they are removed. Fixing that is difficult, since the AST does not retain enough information. I considered trying to place the `use` towards the top of the module after any `extern crate` items, but I couldn't find a way to get a span for the start of a module block (the `mod` span starts at the `mod` keyword, and it seems tricky to find the spot just after the opening bracket and past inner attributes). For now, I just put some comments about the issue. This appears to have been a known issue in #44215 where the test for it was introduced, and the fix seemed to be deferred to later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
When there are multiple macros in use, it can be difficult to tell
which one was responsible for producing an error.
|
|
Add a suggestion when using a type alias instead of trait alias
Fixes #43913
r? `@estebank`
|
|
|
|
Move some tests to more reasonable directories - 6
cc #73494
r? `@petrochenkov`
git mv bad/bad-const-type.* static/
git mv bad/bad-crate-name.* extern
git mv bad/bad-env-capture* fn/
git mv bad/bad-expr-lhs.* expr/
git mv bad/bad-expr-path* expr/
git mv bad/bad-extern-link-attrs.* extern/
git mv bad/bad-intrinsic-monomorphization.* intrinsics/
git mv bad/bad-lint-cap* lint/
git mv bad/bad-main.* fn
git mv bad/bad-method-typaram-kind.* type/
git mv bad/bad-mid-path-type-params.* fn
git mv bad/bad-module.* modules/
git mv bad/bad-sized.* type/
git mv bad/bad-type-env-capture.* fn
|
|
|
|
Detect when suggested paths enter extern crates more rigorously
When reporting resolution errors, the compiler tries to avoid suggesting importing inaccessible paths from other crates. However, the search for suggestions only recognized when it was entering a crate root directly, and so failed to recognize a path like `crate::module::private_item`, where `module` was imported from another crate with `use other_crate::module`, as entering another crate.
Fixes #80079
Fixes #84081
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
diagnostics for ::foo::Bar
|
|
|
|
Signed-off-by: Nell Shamrell <nellshamrell@gmail.com>
|
|
Fixes #82156
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rework diagnostics for wrong number of generic args (fixes #66228 and #71924)
This PR reworks the `wrong number of {} arguments` message, so that it provides more details and contextual hints.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
resolve: Do not put macros into `module.unexpanded_invocations` unless necessary
Macro invocations in modules <sup>(*)</sup> need to be tracked because they can produce named items when expanded.
We cannot give definite answer to queries like "does this module declare name `n`?" until all macro calls in that module are expanded.
Previously we marked too many macros as potentially producing named items.
E.g. in this example
```rust
mod m {
const C: u32 = line!();
}
```
`line!()` cannot emit any items into module `m`, but it was still marked.
This PR fixes that and marks macro calls as "unexpanded in module" only if they can actually emit named items into that module.
Diagnostics in UI test outputs have different order now because this change affects macro expansion order.
<sup>*</sup> Any containers for named items are called modules in resolve (that includes blocks, traits and enums in addition to `mod` items).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suggest calling associated `fn` inside `trait`s
When calling a function that doesn't exist inside of a trait's
associated `fn`, and another associated `fn` in that trait has that
name, suggest calling it with the appropriate fully-qualified path.
Expand the label to be more descriptive.
Prompted by the following user experience:
https://users.rust-lang.org/t/cannot-find-function/50663
|
|
|
|
When calling a function that doesn't exist inside of a trait's
associated `fn`, and another associated `fn` in that trait has that
name, suggest calling it with the appropriate fully-qualified path.
Expand the label to be more descriptive.
Prompted by the following user experience:
https://users.rust-lang.org/t/cannot-find-function/50663
|
|
|
|
Fix #77598.
|
|
Suggest minimal subset features in `incomplete_features` lint
This tells users that we have a minimal subset feature of it and they can fix the lint warning without allowing it.
The wording improvement is helpful :)
Fixes #77913
|
|
|
|
This commit improves the diagnostic modified in rust-lang/rust#77341 to
suggest not only those variants which do not have fields, but those with
fields (by suggesting with placeholders).
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david@davidtw.co>
|
|
r=estebank
resolve: improve "try using the enum's variant"
Fixes #73427.
This PR improves the "try using the enum's variant" suggestion:
- Variants in suggestions would not result in more errors (e.g. use of a struct variant is only suggested if the suggestion can trivially construct that variant). Therefore, suggestions are only emitted for variants that have no fields (since the suggestion can't know what value fields would have).
- Suggestions include the syntax for constructing the variant. If a struct or tuple variant is suggested, then it is constructed in the suggestion - unless in pattern-matching or when arguments are already provided.
- A help message is added which mentions the variants which are no longer suggested.
All of the diagnostic logic introduced by this PR is separated from the normal code path for a successful compilation.
r? `@estebank`
|
|
|
|
This commit improves the "try using the enum's variant" suggestion:
- Variants in suggestions would not result in more errors (e.g. use
of a struct variant is only suggested if the suggestion can
trivially construct that variant). Therefore, suggestions are only
emitted for variants that have no fields (since the suggestion
can't know what value fields would have).
- Suggestions include the syntax for constructing the variant. If a
struct or tuple variant is suggested, then it is constructed in the
suggestion - unless in pattern-matching or when arguments are already
provided.
- A help message is added which mentions the variants which are no
longer suggested.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david@davidtw.co>
|
