Don't suggest extracting out 1-tuple enum variants #6257
Conversation
crates/assists/src/handlers/extract_struct_from_enum_variant.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
repnop
force-pushed
the
enum-struct-extract-check-differing-name
branch
from
6054b25 to
d6378ed
Compare
| // Grab the tuple field inner type as a string (if it exists and is alone) | ||
| // to check against structs that may have a differing name from the enum | ||
| // variant itself | ||
| let variant_inner = { | ||
| let mut fields = field_list.fields(); | ||
| let ty = fields.next().and_then(|field| field.ty()).map(|ty| ty.to_string()); | ||
|
|
||
| match fields.next() { | ||
| Some(_) => None, | ||
| None => ty, | ||
| } | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm, why do we need this check? I'd expect something much simpler, like "if number of fields == 1, do nothing"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure if I follow -- I was under the assumption that the fix for the issue would be to check that, for single-element tuple variants, there needs to be an additional check that no types in the parent scope that also have that name, which avoids the false positive shown in the issue. The assist would be valid for extracting out >1 element tuples regardless, therefore it checks to see if there is more than one element in the tuple.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I mean, for
enum NameClass {
ConstReference(Definition)
}The assist should not be applicable regardnless of whether Definition exists in the scope or not. This can be implemented as a purely syntactic check, I don't think we need to look at tys here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah okay, so it's simply not applying the assist to 1-tuple variants. I'll go ahead and rewrite the PR to do that instead :) thanks for the clarification
repnop
force-pushed
the
enum-struct-extract-check-differing-name
branch
from
d6378ed to
b9790a2
Compare
repnop
changed the title
|
bors r+ Thanks! |
4 participants
Fixes #6241.