| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We first collect unused crates into a map and then walk all extern
crates in crate order.
|
|
|
|
When encountering the following code:
```rust
struct Foo;
fn takes_ref(_: &Foo) {}
let ref opt = Some(Foo);
opt.map(|arg| takes_ref(arg));
```
Suggest using `opt.as_ref().map(|arg| takes_ref(arg));` instead.
This is a stop gap solution until we expand typeck to deal with these
cases in a more graceful way.
|
|
add suggestion applicabilities to librustc and libsyntax
A down payment on #50723. Interested in feedback on whether my `MaybeIncorrect` vs. `MachineApplicable` judgement calls are well-calibrated (and that we have a consensus on what this means).
r? @Manishearth
cc @killercup @estebank
|
|
|
|
Following up to #49896 and #50629. Fixes #32110.
E0689 is weird.
|
|
Consider this a down payment on #50723. To recap, an `Applicability`
enum was recently (#50204) added, to convey to Rustfix and other tools
whether we think it's OK for them to blindly apply the suggestion, or
whether to prompt a human for guidance (because the suggestion might
contain placeholders that we can't infer, or because we think it has a
sufficiently high probability of being wrong even though it's—
presumably—right often enough to be worth emitting in the first place).
When a suggestion is marked as `MaybeIncorrect`, we try to use comments
to indicate precisely why (although there are a few places where we just
say `// speculative` because the present author's subjective judgement
balked at the idea that the suggestion has no false positives).
The `run-rustfix` directive is opporunistically set on some relevant UI
tests (and a couple tests that were in the `test/ui/suggestions`
directory, even if the suggestions didn't originate in librustc or
libsyntax). This is less trivial than it sounds, because a surprising
number of test files aren't equipped to be tested as fixed even when
they contain successfully fixable errors, because, e.g., there are more,
not-directly-related errors after fixing. Some test files need an
attribute or underscore to avoid unused warnings tripping up the "fixed
code is still producing diagnostics" check despite the fixes being
correct; this is an interesting contrast-to/inconsistency-with the
behavior of UI tests (which secretly pass `-A unused`), a behavior which
we probably ought to resolve one way or the other (filed issue #50926).
A few suggestion labels are reworded (e.g., to avoid phrasing it as a
question, which which is discouraged by the style guidelines listed in
`.span_suggestion`'s doc-comment).
|
|
|
|
Currently the lint for removing `extern crate` suggests removing `extern crate`
most of the time, but the rest of the time it suggest replacing it with `use
crate_name`. Unfortunately though when spliced into the original code you're
replacing
extern crate foo;
with
use foo
which is syntactically invalid! This commit ensure that the trailing semicolon
is included in rustc's suggestion to ensure that the code continues to compile
afterwards.
|
|
|
|
This is the first small step towards testing auto-fixable compiler
suggestions using compiletest. Currently, it only checks if next to a
UI test there also happens to a `*.rs.fixed` file, and then uses rustfix
(added as external crate) on the original file, and asserts that it
produces the fixed version.
To show that this works, I've included one such test. I picked this test
case at random (and because it was simple) -- It is not relevant to the
2018 edition. Indeed, in the near future, we want to be able to restrict
rustfix to edition-lints, so this test cast might go away soon.
In case you still think this is somewhat feature-complete, here's a
quick list of things currently missing that I want to add before telling
people they can use this:
- [ ] Make this an actual compiletest mode, with `test [fix] …` output
and everything
- [ ] Assert that fixed files still compile
- [ ] Assert that fixed files produce no (or a known set of) diagnostics
output
- [ ] Update `update-references.sh` to support rustfix
- [ ] Use a published version of rustfix (i.e.: publish a new version
rustfix that exposes a useful API for this)
|
|
Affected methods are `abs`, `signum`, and `powi`.
CC https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/32110#issuecomment-379503183
|
|
|
|
Explicitly mention `Option` in `?` error message.
Save users the time/effort of having to lookup what types implement
the `Try` trait.
|
|
Save users the time/effort of having to lookup what types implement
the `Try` trait.
|
|
This includes a submodule update to rustfmt
in order to allow a stable feature declaration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When finding:
```rust
match &Some(3) {
&None => 1
&Some(2) => { 3 }
_ => 2
}
```
provide the following diagnostic:
```
error: expected one of `,`, `.`, `?`, `}`, or an operator, found `=>`
--> $DIR/missing-comma-in-match.rs:15:18
|
X | &None => 1
| -- - help: missing comma
| |
| while parsing the match arm starting here
X | &Some(2) => { 3 }
| ^^ expected one of `,`, `.`, `?`, `}`, or an operator here
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- filter error on the evaluated value of `Self`
- filter error on the evaluated value of the type arguments
- add argument to include custom note in diagnostic
- allow the parser to parse `Self` when processing attributes
- add custom message to binops
|
|
If the original name is uppercase, use camel case. Otherwise, use snake
case.
|
|
Correctly format `extern crate` conflict resolution help
Closes #45799. Follow up to @Cldfire's #45820.
If the `extern` statement that will have a suggestion ends on a `;`, synthesize a new span that doesn't include it.
|
|
For E0277 on `for` loops, point at the "head" expression
When E0277's span points at a `for` loop, the actual issue is in the
element being iterated. Instead of pointing at the entire loop, point
only at the first line (when possible) so that the span ends in the
element for which E0277 was triggered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Modify the spans used for `for`-loop expression expansion, instead of
creating a new span during error creation.
|
|
|
|
Fix into() cast paren check precedence
As discussed in #47699 the logic for determining if an expression needs parenthesis when suggesting an `.into()` cast is incorrect. Two broken examples from nightly are:
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> main.rs:4:10
|
4 | test(foo as i8);
| ^^^^^^^^^ expected i32, found i8
help: you can cast an `i8` to `i32`, which will sign-extend the source value
|
4 | test(foo as i8.into());
|
```
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> main.rs:4:10
|
4 | test(*foo);
| ^^^^ expected i32, found i8
help: you can cast an `i8` to `i32`, which will sign-extend the source value
|
4 | test(*foo.into());
|
```
As suggested by @petrochenkov switch the precedence check to `PREC_POSTFIX`. This catches both `as` and unary operators. Fixes #47699.
r? @petrochenkov
|
|
As discussed in #47699 the logic for determining if an expression needs
parenthesis when suggesting an `.into()` cast is incorrect. Two broken
examples from nightly are:
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> main.rs:4:10
|
4 | test(foo as i8);
| ^^^^^^^^^ expected i32, found i8
help: you can cast an `i8` to `i32`, which will sign-extend the source value
|
4 | test(foo as i8.into());
|
```
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> main.rs:4:10
|
4 | test(*foo);
| ^^^^ expected i32, found i8
help: you can cast an `i8` to `i32`, which will sign-extend the source value
|
4 | test(*foo.into());
|
```
As suggested by @petrochenkov switch the precedence check to
PREC_POSTFIX. This catches both `as` and unary operators. Fixes #47699.
|
|
When E0277's span points at a `for` loop, the actual issue is in the
element being iterated. Instead of pointing at the entire loop, point
only at the first line (when possible) so that the span ends in the
element for which E0277 was triggered.
|
|
When encountering a method call for an ADT that doesn't have any
implementation of it, we search for traits that could be implemented
that do have that method. Filter out private non-local traits that would
not be able to be implemented.
This doesn't account for public traits that are in a private scope, but
works as a first approximation and is a more correct behavior than the
current one.
|
