Skip to content
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.

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

Provide suggestion for missing fields in patterns #76612

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 15, 2020

Conversation

estebank
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @matthewjasper

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

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 11, 2020
@estebank
Copy link
Contributor Author

r? @davidtwco

@davidtwco
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 14, 2020

📌 Commit 21f8326 has been approved by davidtwco

@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 Sep 14, 2020
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 14, 2020

⌛ Testing commit 21f8326 with merge 1f74248427dd29da73b55e11b7eaec18f0a1ff66...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 14, 2020

💥 Test timed out

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Sep 14, 2020
@estebank
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors retry

@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 Sep 14, 2020
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 15, 2020

⌛ Testing commit 21f8326 with merge 255ceeb...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Sep 15, 2020

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions, checks-azure
Approved by: davidtwco
Pushing 255ceeb to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Sep 15, 2020
@bors bors merged commit 255ceeb into rust-lang:master Sep 15, 2020
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.48.0 milestone Sep 15, 2020
zackmdavis added a commit to zackmdavis/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 17, 2021
In rust-lang#76612, suggestions were added for missing fields in
patterns. However, the suggestions are being inserted just at the end
of the last field in the pattern—before any trailing comma after the
last field. This resulted in the "if you don't care about missing
fields" suggestion to recommend code with a trailing comma after the
field ellipsis (`..,`), which is actually not legal ("`..` must be at
the end and cannot have a trailing comma")!

Incidentally, the doc-comment on `error_unmentioned_fields` was using
`you_cant_use_this_field` as an example field name (presumably
copy-paste inherited from the description of Issue rust-lang#76077), but
the present author found this confusing, because unmentioned fields
aren't necessarily unusable.

The suggested code in the diff this commit introduces to
`destructuring-assignment/struct_destructure_fail.stderr` doesn't
work, but it didn't work beforehand, either (because of the "found
reserved identifier `_`" thing), so you can't really call it a
regression; it could be fixed in a separate PR.

Resolves rust-lang#78511.
m-ou-se added a commit to m-ou-se/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2021
don't suggest erroneous trailing comma after `..`

In rust-lang#76612, suggestions were added for missing fields in patterns. However, the suggestions are being inserted just at the end
of the last field in the pattern—before any trailing comma after the last field. This resulted in the "if you don't care about missing fields" suggestion to recommend code with a trailing comma after the field ellipsis (`..,`), which is actually not legal ("`..` must be at the end and cannot have a trailing comma")!

Incidentally, the doc-comment on `error_unmentioned_fields` was using `you_cant_use_this_field` as an example field name (presumably copy-paste inherited from the description of Issue rust-lang#76077), but the present author found this confusing, because unmentioned fields aren't necessarily unusable.

The suggested code in the diff this commit introduces to `destructuring-assignment/struct_destructure_fail.stderr` doesn't work, but it didn't work beforehand, either (because of the "found reserved identifier `_`" thing), so you can't really call it a regression; it could be fixed in a separate PR.

Resolves rust-lang#78511.

r? `@davidtwco` or `@estebank`
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 19, 2021
don't suggest erroneous trailing comma after `..`

In rust-lang#76612, suggestions were added for missing fields in patterns. However, the suggestions are being inserted just at the end
of the last field in the pattern—before any trailing comma after the last field. This resulted in the "if you don't care about missing fields" suggestion to recommend code with a trailing comma after the field ellipsis (`..,`), which is actually not legal ("`..` must be at the end and cannot have a trailing comma")!

Incidentally, the doc-comment on `error_unmentioned_fields` was using `you_cant_use_this_field` as an example field name (presumably copy-paste inherited from the description of Issue rust-lang#76077), but the present author found this confusing, because unmentioned fields aren't necessarily unusable.

The suggested code in the diff this commit introduces to `destructuring-assignment/struct_destructure_fail.stderr` doesn't work, but it didn't work beforehand, either (because of the "found reserved identifier `_`" thing), so you can't really call it a regression; it could be fixed in a separate PR.

Resolves rust-lang#78511.

r? `@davidtwco` or `@estebank`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants