internal: add more output to the status command
Bit of a lazy change, but this is was pretty handy. I think I should clean up the configuration into something a bit more legible (maybe serialize as JSON?), but I think this is a good enough starting point that we might as well start asking people for it in issue reports.
Add method `Impl::all_in_module(…)` for allowing more localized querying
This PR is motivated by an [outside use](https://github.com/regexident/cargo-modules) of the `ra_ap_hir` crate that would benefit from being able to more efficiently query for all impls of a given module (instead of having to query for its parent crate's impls and then filtering on `impl_hir.module(db) == module_hir`).
I have the suspicion that the code as is won't quite work for file-level modules, since those don't have a block, afaict, but with all the crate-rename and version shenanigans around the `ra_ap_` release process I haven't yet been able to figure out how to patch a `ra_ap_` dependency from a third-party crate (let alone how to test this from inside of `rust-analyzer`), so haven't been able to actually run and test this. 😔
Any hints on how to make this (i.e. the code itself, as well as the testing) work are more than welcome!
chore: remove `UnindexinedProject` notification
This PR is split out from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/pull/17246/ (and contains its changes, which is a little annoying from a review perspective...). I'd like to land this change a week or so after #17246 lands in order to give any users of the unindexed project notification time to adopt migrate.
minor : fixes for ratoml module
This is a follow-up PR to #17058.
- Parse errors are reflected as such by defining a new variant called `ConfigError::ParseError`
- New error collection has been added to store config level agnostic errors.
EDIT : Some things that this PR promised to solve are removed and will be addressed by other PRs
LRU `body_with_source_map` query
This query is being invalidated all the time anyways (we have an extra query on top of it for the body incrementality that is not source dependent), so there is little reason to keep these around all the time when only some IDE features are interested in them.
feat: go-to-def and find-references on control-flow keywords
fix#17517.
This PR implements **go-to-definition** and **find-references** functionalities for control flow keywords, which is similar to the behaviors in the `highlight-related` module. Besides, this PR also fixes some incorrect behaviors in `highlight-related`.
## Changes
1. **Support for go-to-definition on control flow keywords**:
This PR introduces functionality allowing users to navigate on the definition of control flow keywords (`return`, `break`, `continue`).
Commit: 2a3244ee147f898dd828c06352645ae1713c260f..7391e7a608634709db002a4cb09229de4d12c056.
2. **Bug fixes and refactoring in highlight-related**:
- **Handling return/break/continue within try_blocks**:
This PR adjusted the behavior of these keywords when they occur within `try_blocks`. When encounter these keywords, the program should exit the outer function or loop which containing the `try_blocks`, rather than the `try_blocks` itself; while the `?` will cause the program to exit `try_blocks`.
Commit: 59d697e807f0197f59814b37dca1563959da4aa1.
- **Support highlighting keywords in macro expansion for highlight-related**:
Commit: 88df24f01727c23a667a763ee3ee0cec22d5ad52.
- Detailed description for the bug fixes
+ The previous implementation of `preorder_expr` incorrectly treated `try_blocks` as new contexts, thereby r-a will not continue to traverse inner `return` and `break/continue` statements. To resolve this, a new function `preorder_expr_with_ctx_checker` has been added, allowing users to specify which expressions to skip.
* For example, when searching for the `?` in the context, r-a should skip `try_blocks` where the `?` insides just works for `try_blocks`. But when search for the `return` keyword, r-a should collect both the `return` keywords inside and outside the `try_blocks`
+ Thus, this PR added `WalkExpandedExprCtx` (builder pattern). It offers the following improvements: customizable context skipping, maintenance of loop depth (for `break`/`continue`), and handling macro expansion during traversal.
3. **Support for find-references on control flow keywords**:
This PR enables users to find all references to control flow keywords.
Commit: 9202a33f81218fb9c2edb5d42e6b4de85b0323a8.
Fix more path resolution for included submodules
Now with more comprehensive testing! This adds tests for includes within modules. Previous testing was not comprehensive enough since submodules that use `include!` didn't actually work either! The `ModDir` used for resolving mods relative to included files has to be `ModDir::root()`. The original test just so happened to put the submodules in the root which made this work, but if you put the `include!` inside a `mod` block it didn't work.
With this change, when collecting a macro expansion, if the macro call is an `include!`, we use the `ModDir::root()` instead of the current module we're in.
- Parse errors are reflected as such by defining a new variant called `ConfigError::ParseError`
- New error collection has been added to store config level agnostic errors.
Prefer standard library paths over shorter extern deps re-exports
This should generally speed up path finding for std items as we no longer bother looking through all external dependencies. It also makes more sense to prefer importing std items from the std dependencies directly.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/issues/17540
Fix path resolution for child mods of those expanded by `include!`
Child modules wouldn't use the correct candidate paths due to a branch that doesn't seem to be doing what it's intended to do. Removing the branch fixes the problem and all existing test cases pass.
Having no knowledge of how any of this works, I believe this fixes#17645. Using another test that writes the included mod directly into `lib.rs` instead, I found the difference can be traced to the candidate files we use to look up mods. A separate branch for if the file comes from an `include!` macro doesn't take into account the original mod we're contained within:
```rust
None if file_id.macro_file().map_or(false, |it| it.is_include_macro(db.upcast())) => {
candidate_files.push(format!("{}.rs", name.display(db.upcast())));
candidate_files.push(format!("{}/mod.rs", name.display(db.upcast())));
}
```
I'm not sure why this branch exists. Tracing the branch back takes us to 3bb9efb but it doesn't say *why* the branch was added. The test case that was added in this commit passes with the branch removed, so I think it's just superfluous at this point.
