From db2f3d7a8827055342b3385622470926d6056fc4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Zack M. Davis" Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 13:18:39 -0700 Subject: clarify why we're suggesting removing semicolon after braced items Previously (issue #46186, pull-request #46258), a suggestion was added to remove the semicolon after we fail to parse an item, but issue #51603 complains that it's still insufficiently obvious why. Let's add a note. Resolves #51603. --- src/libsyntax/parse/parser.rs | 16 ++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) (limited to 'src/libsyntax') diff --git a/src/libsyntax/parse/parser.rs b/src/libsyntax/parse/parser.rs index 673157d0ffa..4c0397dbb29 100644 --- a/src/libsyntax/parse/parser.rs +++ b/src/libsyntax/parse/parser.rs @@ -6132,6 +6132,22 @@ impl<'a> Parser<'a> { err.span_suggestion_short_with_applicability( self.span, msg, "".to_string(), Applicability::MachineApplicable ); + if !items.is_empty() { // Issue #51603 + let previous_item = &items[items.len()-1]; + let previous_item_kind_name = match previous_item.node { + // say "braced struct" because tuple-structs and + // braceless-empty-struct declarations do take a semicolon + ItemKind::Struct(..) => Some("braced struct"), + ItemKind::Enum(..) => Some("enum"), + ItemKind::Trait(..) => Some("trait"), + ItemKind::Union(..) => Some("union"), + _ => None, + }; + if let Some(name) = previous_item_kind_name { + err.help(&format!("{} declarations are not followed by a semicolon", + name)); + } + } } else { err.span_label(self.span, "expected item"); } -- cgit 1.4.1-3-g733a5