rust-lang / rust-lang/rust-analyzer
Implement missing members suggestion shadows type parameters
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 16.9k
- Forks
- 2.2k
- Avg merge
- 1d 12h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 72
Description
In the following minimal example in latest nightly (using a struct<T> DiagnosticResult { ... }), the "implement missing members" intention shadows the type parameter T.
This creates rather confusing error messages if you didn't actually read the code that it inserted!
The two type parameters T and T are different, but I imagine that in a more complex scenario than this, it could hide the source of bugs. I think rust-analyzer should probably output code similar to
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
Reproduce the minimal struct<T> DiagnosticResult example and invoke the “implement missing members” intention. Trace the intention's generated code and verify that its type parameter does not shadow the existing T; the issue is done when the inserted code uses a distinct parameter name and no longer causes the confusing errors shown.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- devtools
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100