fix: assists panic when trying to edit usage inside macro #15810
Conversation
This file contains 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
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #16027) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Veykril
approved these changes
Jan 2, 2024
Veykril
force-pushed
the
assist_panics_in_macros
branch
from
41d0883
to
b105e9b
Compare
|
@bors r+ |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
This was referenced May 9, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
When we try to make a syntax node mutable inside a macro to edit it, it seems like the edits aren't properly reflected and will cause a panic when trying to make another syntax node mutable.
This PR changes
bool_to_enumandpromote_local_to_constto use the original syntax range instead to edit the original file instead of the macro file. I'm not sure how to do it forinline_callwith the example I mentioned in the issue, so I've left it out for now.Fixes #15807