Closed
Conversation
Includes minor refactor and more helpful errors in case of incorrect repr attributes
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
estebank
reviewed
Jun 4, 2021
compiler/rustc_attr/src/builtin.rs
Outdated
Comment on lines
846
to
851
| .span_suggestion( | ||
| item.path.span.shrink_to_hi().to(item.span.shrink_to_hi()), | ||
| "remove additional values", | ||
| format!("{}", name), | ||
| Applicability::MachineApplicable, | ||
| ) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note that if the suggestion is applied, the resulting code would be malformed. Change this to the following, to make it clear for the user and correct for the machines.
Suggested change
| .span_suggestion( | |
| item.path.span.shrink_to_hi().to(item.span.shrink_to_hi()), | |
| "remove additional values", | |
| format!("{}", name), | |
| Applicability::MachineApplicable, | |
| ) | |
| .span_suggestion_verbose( | |
| item.path.span.shrink_to_hi().to(item.span.shrink_to_hi()), | |
| "remove additional values", | |
| String::new(), | |
| Applicability::MachineApplicable, | |
| ) |
| @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ | |||
| #![feature(repr_simd)] | |||
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Check if we can make this test also check for diagnostic applicability. It might not be possible (if there are further errors afterwards), but let's confirm.
Suggested change
| #![feature(repr_simd)] | |
| // run-rustfix | |
| #![feature(repr_simd)] |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added a separate file for fixable suggestions
compiler/rustc_attr/src/builtin.rs
Outdated
Comment on lines
866
to
880
| err.span_suggestion( | ||
| item.span, | ||
| "use parentheses instead", | ||
| format!("{}({})", name, int), | ||
| Applicability::MachineApplicable, | ||
| ); | ||
| } | ||
| ast::LitKind::Str(s, _) => { | ||
| err.span_suggestion( | ||
| item.span, | ||
| "use parentheses instead", | ||
| format!("{}({})", name, s), | ||
| Applicability::MachineApplicable, | ||
| ); | ||
| } |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we see if we could make these multipart_suggestions where we add the parentheses in the right place?
compiler/rustc_attr/src/builtin.rs
Outdated
Comment on lines
892
to
897
| .span_suggestion( | ||
| item.span, | ||
| "add a value", | ||
| format!("{}(/* value */)", name), | ||
| Applicability::HasPlaceholders, | ||
| ) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| .span_suggestion( | |
| item.span, | |
| "add a value", | |
| format!("{}(/* value */)", name), | |
| Applicability::HasPlaceholders, | |
| ) | |
| .span_suggestion_verbose( | |
| item.span.shrink_to_hi(), | |
| "add a value", | |
| "(/* value */)".to_string(), | |
| Applicability::HasPlaceholders, | |
| ) |
mibac138
commented
Jun 6, 2021
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have no idea why but I can't make this fix to work. The suggestion is machine applicable, shows in stderr but for whatever reason doesn't show up in suggestions after I added a dbg call:
diff --git a/src/tools/compiletest/src/runtest.rs b/src/tools/compiletest/src/runtest.rs
--- a/src/tools/compiletest/src/runtest.rs (revision 4319f72eca7f720d458355f517f59502fa986dd7)
+++ b/src/tools/compiletest/src/runtest.rs (date 1622939470653)
@@ -3313,6 +3313,7 @@
},
)
.unwrap();
+ dbg!(&suggestions);
let fixed_code = apply_suggestions(&unfixed_code, &suggestions).unwrap_or_else(|_| {
panic!("failed to apply suggestions for {:?} with rustfix", self.testpaths.file)
});
mibac138
commented
Jun 6, 2021
src/test/ui/repr/rustfix.stderr
Outdated
Comment on lines
+12
to
+23
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be divided into two separate errors or is it fine left as is?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's somewhat concerning that it suggests "use parentheses" and leaving foo alone when a number is expected there. This might not need to be addressed now.
Should this be divided into two separate errors or is it fine left as is?
What do you mean? Having one for the lack of parentheses and a separate for foo not being a positive number? Personally I prefer to consolidate errors when possible, and I think it's fine overall as is.
mibac138
commented
Jun 6, 2021
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Collaborator
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
Member
|
@mibac138 Triage: Seems CI is still red here. |
crlf0710
added
S-waiting-on-author
Collaborator
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #87029) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
JohnCSimon
added
the
S-inactive
Member
|
Ping from triage |
Dylan-DPC
removed
the
S-inactive
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
8 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Includes minor refactor and more helpful errors in case of incorrect
repr attributes
Fixes #85713
r? @estebank