Skip to content

Detect struct literal needing parentheses #106620

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 12, 2023
Merged

Detect struct literal needing parentheses #106620

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 12, 2023

Conversation

estebank
Copy link
Contributor

@estebank estebank commented Jan 9, 2023

Fix #82051.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 9, 2023

r? @lcnr

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added A-translation Area: Translation infrastructure, and migrating existing diagnostics to SessionDiagnostic S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jan 9, 2023
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 9, 2023

rustc_error_messages was changed

cc @davidtwco, @compiler-errors, @JohnTitor, @estebank, @TaKO8Ki

@Naplues
Copy link

Naplues commented Jan 9, 2023

LGTM

Naplues
Naplues reviewed Jan 9, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@Naplues Naplues left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM......OK

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Jan 9, 2023

r? compiler

@rustbot rustbot assigned petrochenkov and unassigned lcnr Jan 9, 2023
@davidtwco
Copy link
Member

r? @davidtwco
@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jan 9, 2023

📌 Commit 1c40c59342158a7930ac4f901a44f808d34379db has been approved by davidtwco

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@rustbot rustbot assigned davidtwco and unassigned petrochenkov Jan 9, 2023
@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jan 9, 2023
@Noratrieb
Copy link
Member

Tests moved from src/tests to the tests directory in the root, can you rebase and move them?
@bors r-
@rustbot author

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Jan 11, 2023
@bors bors removed the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Jan 11, 2023
@estebank
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors r=davidtwco

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jan 11, 2023

📌 Commit 5311938 has been approved by davidtwco

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jan 11, 2023
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Jan 11, 2023
Merged
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 11, 2023
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#106743 - matthiaskrgr:rollup-q5dpxms, r=matth…
56ee65a 
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 6 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#106620 (Detect struct literal needing parentheses)
 - rust-lang#106622 (Detect out of bounds range pattern value)
 - rust-lang#106703 (Note predicate span on `ImplDerivedObligation`)
 - rust-lang#106705 (Report fulfillment errors in new trait solver)
 - rust-lang#106726 (Fix some typos in code comments.)
 - rust-lang#106734 (Deny having src/test exisiting in tidy)

Failed merges:

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 7ee3fd2 into rust-lang:master Jan 12, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.68.0 milestone Jan 12, 2023
@fmease fmease mentioned this pull request Mar 24, 2025
Merged
Zalathar added a commit to Zalathar/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2025
@Zalathar
Rollup merge of rust-lang#138898 - fmease:decrustify-parser-post-ty-a…
30344f7 
…scr, r=compiler-errors

Mostly parser: Eliminate code that's been dead / semi-dead since the removal of type ascription syntax

**Disclaimer**: This PR is intended to mostly clean up code as opposed to bringing about behavioral changes. Therefore it doesn't aim to address any of the 'FIXME: remove after a month [dated: 2023-05-02]: "type ascription syntax has been removed, see issue [#]101728"'.

---

By commit:

1. Removes truly dead code:
   * Since 1.71 (rust-lang#109128) `let _ = { f: x };` is a syntax error as opposed to a semantic error which allows the parse-time diagnostic (suggestion) "*struct literal body without path // you might have forgotten […]*" to kick in.
   * The analysis-time diagnostic (suggestion) from <=1.70 "*cannot find value \`f\` in this scope // you might have forgotten […]*" is therefore no longer reachable.
2. Updates `is_certainly_not_a_block` to be in line with the current grammar:
   * The seq. `{ ident:` is definitely not the start of a block. Before the removal of ty ascr, `{ ident: ty_start` would begin a block expr.
   * This shouldn't make more code compile IINM, it should *ultimately* only affect diagnostics.
   * For example, `if T { f: () } {}` will now be interpreted as an `if` with struct lit `T { f: () }` as its *condition* (which is banned in the parser anyway) as opposed to just `T` (with the *consequent* being `f : ()` which is also invalid (since 1.71)). The diagnostics are almost the same because we have two separate parse recovery procedures + diagnostics: `StructLiteralNeedingParens` (*invalid struct lit*) before and `StructLiteralNotAllowedHere` (*struct lits aren't allowed here*) now, as you can see from the diff.
   * (As an aside, even before this PR, fn `maybe_suggest_struct_literal` should've just used the much older & clearer `StructLiteralNotAllowedHere`)
   * NB: This does sadly regress the compiler output for `tests/ui/parser/type-ascription-in-pattern.rs` but that can be fixed in follow-up PRs. It's not super important IMO and a natural consequence.
3. Removes code that's become dead due to the prior commit.
   * Basically reverts rust-lang#106620 + rust-lang#112475 (without regressing rustc's output!).
   * Now the older & more robust parse recovery procedure (cc `StructLiteralNotAllowedHere`) takes care of the cases the removed code used to handle.
   * This automatically fixes the suggestions for \[[playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2024&gist=7e2030163b11ee96d17adc3325b01780)\]:
     * `if Ty::<i32> { f: K }.m() {}`: `if Ty::<i32> { SomeStruct { f: K } }.m() {}` (broken) → ` if (Ty::<i32> { f: K }).m() {}`
     * `if <T as Trait>::Out { f: K::<> }.m() {}`: `if <T as Trait>(::Out { f: K::<> }).m() {}` (broken) → `if (<T as Trait>::Out { f: K::<> }).m() {}`
4. Merge and simplify UI tests pertaining to this issue, so it's easier to add more regression tests like for the two cases mentioned above.
5. Merge UI tests and add the two regression tests.

Best reviewed commit by commit (on request I'll partially squash after approval).
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2025
@rust-timer
Unrolled build for rust-lang#138898
d5847fb 
Rollup merge of rust-lang#138898 - fmease:decrustify-parser-post-ty-ascr, r=compiler-errors

Mostly parser: Eliminate code that's been dead / semi-dead since the removal of type ascription syntax

**Disclaimer**: This PR is intended to mostly clean up code as opposed to bringing about behavioral changes. Therefore it doesn't aim to address any of the 'FIXME: remove after a month [dated: 2023-05-02]: "type ascription syntax has been removed, see issue [#]101728"'.

---

By commit:

1. Removes truly dead code:
   * Since 1.71 (rust-lang#109128) `let _ = { f: x };` is a syntax error as opposed to a semantic error which allows the parse-time diagnostic (suggestion) "*struct literal body without path // you might have forgotten […]*" to kick in.
   * The analysis-time diagnostic (suggestion) from <=1.70 "*cannot find value \`f\` in this scope // you might have forgotten […]*" is therefore no longer reachable.
2. Updates `is_certainly_not_a_block` to be in line with the current grammar:
   * The seq. `{ ident:` is definitely not the start of a block. Before the removal of ty ascr, `{ ident: ty_start` would begin a block expr.
   * This shouldn't make more code compile IINM, it should *ultimately* only affect diagnostics.
   * For example, `if T { f: () } {}` will now be interpreted as an `if` with struct lit `T { f: () }` as its *condition* (which is banned in the parser anyway) as opposed to just `T` (with the *consequent* being `f : ()` which is also invalid (since 1.71)). The diagnostics are almost the same because we have two separate parse recovery procedures + diagnostics: `StructLiteralNeedingParens` (*invalid struct lit*) before and `StructLiteralNotAllowedHere` (*struct lits aren't allowed here*) now, as you can see from the diff.
   * (As an aside, even before this PR, fn `maybe_suggest_struct_literal` should've just used the much older & clearer `StructLiteralNotAllowedHere`)
   * NB: This does sadly regress the compiler output for `tests/ui/parser/type-ascription-in-pattern.rs` but that can be fixed in follow-up PRs. It's not super important IMO and a natural consequence.
3. Removes code that's become dead due to the prior commit.
   * Basically reverts rust-lang#106620 + rust-lang#112475 (without regressing rustc's output!).
   * Now the older & more robust parse recovery procedure (cc `StructLiteralNotAllowedHere`) takes care of the cases the removed code used to handle.
   * This automatically fixes the suggestions for \[[playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2024&gist=7e2030163b11ee96d17adc3325b01780)\]:
     * `if Ty::<i32> { f: K }.m() {}`: `if Ty::<i32> { SomeStruct { f: K } }.m() {}` (broken) → ` if (Ty::<i32> { f: K }).m() {}`
     * `if <T as Trait>::Out { f: K::<> }.m() {}`: `if <T as Trait>(::Out { f: K::<> }).m() {}` (broken) → `if (<T as Trait>::Out { f: K::<> }).m() {}`
4. Merge and simplify UI tests pertaining to this issue, so it's easier to add more regression tests like for the two cases mentioned above.
5. Merge UI tests and add the two regression tests.

Best reviewed commit by commit (on request I'll partially squash after approval).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Naplues Naplues Naplues left review comments

@davidtwco davidtwco davidtwco approved these changes

Assignees

@davidtwco davidtwco

Labels
A-translation Area: Translation infrastructure, and migrating existing diagnostics to SessionDiagnostic S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.68.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Bad diagnostic: "error: struct literal body without path"
8 participants
@estebank @rustbot @Naplues @lcnr @davidtwco @bors @Noratrieb @petrochenkov