[E0026] Non-Existent Field Extraction in Struct Pattern

[MahadMuhammad]

Non-Existent Field Extraction in Struct Pattern
variant Foo::D does not have a field named b

Code Tested from E0026

// https://doc.rust-lang.org/error_codes/E0026.html
fn main() {
    struct Thing {
        x: u32,
        y: u32,
    }

    let thing = Thing { x: 0, y: 0 };

    match thing {
        Thing { x, z } => {} // error: `Thing::z` field doesn't exist
    }
}

Output:

mahad@linux:~/Desktop/mahad/gccrs-build$ gcc/crab1 ../mahad-testsuite/E0026.rs -frust-incomplete-and-experimental-compiler-do-not-use
../mahad-testsuite/E0026.rs:11:20: error: variant Thing does not have a field named z [E0026]
   11 |         Thing { x, z } => {} // error: `Thing::z` field doesn't exist
      |                    ^
../mahad-testsuite/E0026.rs:11:9: error: pattern does not mention fields y
   11 |         Thing { x, z } => {} // error: `Thing::z` field doesn't exist
      |         ^~~~~

Analyzing compilation unit

Time variable                                   usr           sys          wall           GGC
 TOTAL                              :   0.00          0.00          0.00          146k
Extra diagnostic checks enabled; compiler may run slowly.
Configure with --enable-checking=release to disable checks.

Running testcases:

• gcc/testsuite/rust/compile/match3.rs

/home/mahad/Desktop/mahad/gccrs/gcc/testsuite/rust/compile/match3.rs:13:18: error: variant D does not have a field named z [E0026]
/home/mahad/Desktop/mahad/gccrs/gcc/testsuite/rust/compile/match3.rs:13:9: error: pattern does not mention fields x, y
compiler exited with status 1

gcc/rust/ChangeLog:

* typecheck/rust-hir-type-check-pattern.cc (TypeCheckPattern::visit): called rust_error_at

[philberty]

LGTM nice work

[CohenArthur]

Both the lines you modified have the exact same error message and pattern. I think it would be worth opening an issue to factor them into one function (emit_invalid_field_error or w/ever) in this file, and it's something you can work on if you like. This will make it easier for you to rework the Error emitting code once we get to that point in your GSoC project @MahadMuhammad

[MahadMuhammad]

• @CohenArthur Done :)
• Refactoring Field Error Function into one Function #2336 (comment)