| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
... | |
|
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Coenen <[email protected]>
|
|
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Coenen <[email protected]>
|
|
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Coenen <[email protected]>
|
|
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Coenen <[email protected]>
|
|
|
|
| |
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Coenen <[email protected]>
|
| |
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
6350: Make IncorrectDiagnostic match rustc by copying rustc's code. r=popzxc a=ArifRoktim
This closes #6343 and closes #6345.
The old algorithm which used a `DetectedCase` enum, didn't match how rustc thinks of cases. Some inputs can be interpreted as more than 1 case depending on the situation. For example, to rustc:
- `ABCD`: Can be both camel case and upper snake case
- `X86_64`: Can be both camel case and upper snake case
I could've made `detect_case` return a collection of `DetectedCase` and then modified the other code as such, but I think using the same code rustc uses is simpler and a surefire way to achieve the same diagnostics as rustc.
Co-authored-by: Arif Roktim <[email protected]>
|
| | |
|
|/
|
|
|
| |
The lifetime placeholder can be replaced by the static lifetime, and for array
sizes we should just be using a concrete const.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
- add panic context for the trait goal if CHALK_DEBUG is set
- print the Chalk program even if we're panicking
- log goal/solution while TLS is still set
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
6319: Properly identify camel cased acronyms as UpperCamelCase r=popzxc a=ArifRoktim
This closes #6305.
Co-authored-by: Arif Roktim <[email protected]>
|
| | |
|
|\ \
| |/
|/|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
6307: Add whitelist of safe intrinsics r=frazar a=frazar
This PR should fix #5996, where intrinsic operations where all marked as unsafe.
I'm rather new to this codebase, so I might be doing something *very* wrong. Please forgive me!
In particular, I'm not sure how to "check that we are in extern `rust-intrinsics`" as mentioned [in this comment](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues/5996#issuecomment-709234802).
Co-authored-by: Francesco Zardi <[email protected]>
|
| | |
|
|/ |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <[email protected]>
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
check
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
* Chalk very recently (like an hour ago) merged a fix that prevents rust analyzer from panicking. This allows it to be usable again for code that hits those situations. See #6134, #6145, Probably #6120
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
5971: Implement async blocks r=flodiebold a=oxalica
Fix #4018
@flodiebold already gave a generic guide in the issue. Here's some concern about implementation detail:
- Chalk doesn't support generator type yet.
- Adding generator type as a brand new type (ctor) can be complex and need to *re-introduced* builtin impls. (Like how we implement closures before native closure support of chalk, which is already removed in #5401 )
- The output type of async block should be known after type inference of the whole body.
- We cannot directly get the type from source like return-positon-impl-trait. But we still need to provide trait bounds when chalk asking for `opaque_ty_data`.
- During the inference, the output type of async block can be temporary unknown and participate the later inference.
`let a = async { None }; let _: i32 = a.await.unwrap();`
So in this PR, the type of async blocks is inferred as an opaque type parameterized by the `Future::Output` type it should be, like what we do with closure type.
And it really works now.
Well, I still have some questions:
- The bounds `AsyncBlockImplType<T>: Future<Output = T>` is currently generated in `opaque_ty_data`. I'm not sure if we should put this code here.
- Type of async block is now rendered as `impl Future<Output = OutputType>`. Do we need to special display to hint that it's a async block? Note that closure type has its special format, instead of `impl Fn(..) -> ..` or function type.
Co-authored-by: oxalica <[email protected]>
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|