nordic-dev.net/rust
nordic-dev.net/rust
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust.git synced 2025-05-04 05:57:36 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
40d1cb406d
rust/tests/ui/parser/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.stderr

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

134 lines
5.6 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
error: expected `,`, or `}`, found `field2`
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:17:16
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
LL | field1: i32
| ^ help: try adding a comma: `,`
error: expected `,`, or `}`, found `field3`
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:18:14
|
LL | field2: E
| ^ help: try adding a comma: `,`
error: expected `:`, found `=`
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:26:12
|
LL | field1 = i32,
| ^
| |
| expected `:`
| help: field names and their types are separated with `:`
error: expected `:`, found `;`
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:27:11
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
LL | field2; E,
| ^
| |
| expected `:`
| help: field names and their types are separated with `:`
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:8:16
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
LL | field1: i32 = 42,
| ^^^^^
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:9:14
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
LL | field2: E = E::A,
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
| ^^^^^^^
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:10:16
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
LL | field3: i32 = 1 + 2,
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
| ^^^^^^^^
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:11:16
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
LL | field4: i32 = { 1 + 2 },
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:12:14
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
LL | field5: E = foo(42),
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
| ^^^^^^^^^^
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:13:14
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
LL | field6: E = { foo(42) },
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:19:16
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
LL | field3: i32 = 1 + 2,
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
| ^^^^^^^^
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:20:16
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
LL | field4: i32 = { 1 + 2 },
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:21:14
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
LL | field5: E = foo(42),
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
| ^^^^^^^^^^
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
review comments: rewordings
2024-12-06 19:43:01 +00:00
error[E0658]: default values on fields are experimental
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
--> $DIR/struct-default-values-and-missing-field-separator.rs:22:14
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
|
LL | field6: E = { foo(42) },
Make parse error suggestions verbose and fix spans Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style. When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
2024-07-06 03:07:46 +00:00
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
= note: see issue #132162 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(default_field_values)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax Parse unsupported "default field const values": ```rust struct S { field: Type = const_val, } ``` Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion: ```rust struct S { field; Type, field2= Type, } ```
2021-05-01 19:58:15 +00:00
error: aborting due to 14 previous errors
Introduce `default_field_values` feature Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.
2024-08-24 17:22:48 +00:00
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0658`.
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink