Detect likely . -> .. typo in method calls
#105765
Conversation
|
r? @lcnr (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
r? @oli-obk |
| let suggestion = | ||
| if res.is_none() { this.report_missing_type_error(path) } else { None }; | ||
| let suggestion = if let Some((start, end)) = this.diagnostic_metadata.in_range | ||
| && path[0].ident.span.lo() == end.span.lo() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't look too much into this, but does this check that this is a method?
We should also probably double check this is a path with one segment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It doesn't, but during resolve we don't have enough data to do that (although now that I'm tracking start I might be able to cobble something together).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm comfortable with the weasel wording on this one suggestion: it is a guess, and we'd have to perform more extensive surgery on resolve to track more state, and it is already quite a beast.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My only concern is that this triggers when we have any resolution error on the RHS of a range, e.g.
fn foo() {
a..b;
}Results in:
error[E0425]: cannot find value `a` in this scope
--> /home/ubuntu/test.rs:2:5
|
2 | a..b;
| ^ not found in this scope
error[E0425]: cannot find value `b` in this scope
--> /home/ubuntu/test.rs:2:8
|
2 | a..b;
| ^ not found in this scope
|
help: you might have meant to write a method call instead of a range
|
2 - a..b;
2 + a.b;
I'd much prefer if the wording was made to not mention methods in specific, but focus on the . itself -- something like "you might've meant to write the . operator instead of a range"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What do you think of "you might have meant to write . instead of .."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, that works fine.
Just would prefer it to not mention "method" unless we can verify it's actually a method, but since this code is in resolve, I totally understand how that's hard, haha.
|
@rustbot author |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-author
estebank
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
r=me -- preferably with the resolve diagnostic's wording made more generic, but I guess I won't hold you to it |
|
@bors r=compiler-errors |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
…mpiler-errors Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#103718 (More inference-friendly API for lazy) - rust-lang#105765 (Detect likely `.` -> `..` typo in method calls) - rust-lang#105852 (Suggest rewriting a malformed hex literal if we expect a float) - rust-lang#105965 (Provide local extern function arg names) - rust-lang#106064 (Partially fix `explicit_outlives_requirements` lint in macros) - rust-lang#106179 (Fix a formatting error in Iterator::for_each docs) - rust-lang#106181 (Fix doc comment parsing description in book) - rust-lang#106187 (Update the documentation of `Vec` to use `extend(array)` instead of `extend(array.iter().copied())`) - rust-lang#106189 (Fix UnsafeCell Documentation Spelling Error) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Fix #65015.