rust-lang / rust-lang/rust-analyzer
multi macro_rules with the same name, rename failed
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
A-ide
A-nameres
C-bug
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 16.9k
- Forks
- 2.2k
- Avg merge
- 1d 12h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 72
Description
rust-analyzer version: rust-analyzer 1.82.0-nightly (7c2012d0 2024-07-26)
rustc version: rustc 1.82.0-nightly (7c2012d0e 2024-07-26)
editor or extension: Vim9.1 coc-rust-analyzer
code snippet to reproduce:
fn main() {
macro_rules! foo {
() => {
1
};
}
assert_eq!(foo!(), 1);
macro_rules! foo {
() => {
2
};
}
assert_eq!(foo!(), 2); // in this line rename `foo`
}
rename foo into bar
fn main() {
macro_rules! foo {
() => {
1
};
}
assert_eq!(bar!(), 1);
macro_rules! bar {
() => {
2
};
}
assert_eq!(bar!(), 2); // in this line rename `foo`
}
expect output:
fn main() {
macro_rules! foo {
() => {
1
};
}
assert_eq!(foo!(), 1);
macro_rules! bar {
() => {
2
};
}
assert_eq!(bar!(), 2); // in this line rename `foo`
}
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reproducing the rename operation in the provided macro_rules example using rust-analyzer and Vim with coc-rust-analyzer. Trace the rename handling for the selected macro and verify that only the intended definition and invocation are changed, matching the expected output.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- developer-experience
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Clearly specified
- Newbie friendliness
- 48/100