Subtree update of rust-analyzer
#119988
Merged
Subtree update of rust-analyzer
#119988
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
… previous implementation
implement the predicate set on the case function from traits
internal: VFS no longer stores all source files in memory Turns out there is no need to keep the files around. We either upload them to salsa once processed, or we need to keep them around for the `DidChangeTextDocumentNotification`, but that notification is only valid for opened documents, so instead we can just keep the files around in the `MemDocs`! Fixes rust-lang/rust-analyzer#16301
Builtin derives are hygienic Closes rust-lang/rust-analyzer#16295
minor: Remove newline and add dot in syntax docs While reading through the docs I came across these two small typos.
rust-analyzer has logic that discounts suggesting `use`s for private
imports, but that logic is unnecessarily strict - for instance given
this code:
```rust
mod foo {
pub struct Foo;
}
pub(crate) use self::foo::*;
mod bar {
fn main() {
Foo$0;
}
}
```
... RA will suggest to add `use crate::foo::Foo;`, which not only makes
the code overly verbose (especially in larger code bases), but also is
disjoint with what rustc itself suggests.
This commit adjusts the logic, so that `pub(crate)` imports are taken
into account when generating the suggestions; considering rustc's
behavior, I think this change doesn't warrant any extra configuration
flag.
Note that this is my first commit to RA, so I guess the approach taken
here might be suboptimal - certainly feels somewhat hacky, maybe there's
some better way of finding out the optimal import path 😅
…=Veykril
fix: Acknowledge `pub(crate)` imports in import suggestions
rust-analyzer has logic that discounts suggesting `use`s for private imports, but that logic is unnecessarily strict - for instance given this code:
```rust
mod foo {
pub struct Foo;
}
pub(crate) use self::foo::*;
mod bar {
fn main() {
Foo$0;
}
}
```
... RA will suggest to add `use crate::foo::Foo;`, which not only makes the code overly verbose (especially in larger code bases), but also is disjoint with what rustc itself suggests.
This commit adjusts the logic, so that `pub(crate)` imports are taken into account when generating the suggestions; considering rustc's behavior, I think this change doesn't warrant any extra configuration flag.
Note that this is my first commit to RA, so I guess the approach taken here might be suboptimal - certainly feels somewhat hacky, maybe there's some better way of finding out the optimal import path 😅
internal: Consider all kinds of explicit private imports in find_path Builds on top of rust-lang/rust-analyzer#16265 to make things a bit more general, now we consider all explicit private imports.
fix: Fix nested includes resolving from the wrong base file Fixes rust-lang/rust-analyzer#16109
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
rust-analyzer is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/rust-analyzer instead. cc @rust-lang/rust-analyzer |
|
@bors r+ p=1 subtree sync |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 15, 2024
Subtree update of `rust-analyzer` r? ghost
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (bfcc027): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)ResultsThis is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
CyclesResultsThis is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 666.532s -> 667.719s (0.18%) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
r? ghost