Suggest better place to add call parentheses for method expressions wrapped in parentheses #89055
+47
−4
Conversation
r? @wesleywiser (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
This comment has been hidden.
This comment has been hidden.
…rapped in parentheses
wesleywiser
approved these changes
Sep 18, 2021
Awesome!
@bors r+ rollup |
|
JohnTitor
added a commit
to JohnTitor/rust
that referenced
this issue
Sep 19, 2021
…ens, r=wesleywiser Suggest better place to add call parentheses for method expressions wrapped in parentheses I wanted to improve the suggestion a bit to both remove the wrapping parentheses **and** add call parentheses by both calling `suggest_method_call` and using `multipart_suggestion`. But I very quickly ran into a problem where multiple overlapping machine applicable suggestions cannot be properly applied together. So I applied the suggestion from the issue and only added the call parentheses directly after the expression. Fixes: rust-lang#89044
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Sep 19, 2021
Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#87960 (Suggest replacing an inexisting field for an unmentioned field) - rust-lang#88855 (Allow simd_shuffle to accept vectors of any length) - rust-lang#88966 (Check for shadowing issues involving block labels) - rust-lang#88996 (Fix linting when trailing macro expands to a trailing semi) - rust-lang#89017 (fix potential race in AtomicU64 time monotonizer) - rust-lang#89021 (Add a separate error for `dyn Trait` in `const fn`) - rust-lang#89023 (Resolve issue 85066) - rust-lang#89051 (Add intra-doc links and small changes to `std::os` to be more consistent) - rust-lang#89053 (refactor: VecDeques IntoIter fields to private) - rust-lang#89055 (Suggest better place to add call parentheses for method expressions wrapped in parentheses) - rust-lang#89081 (Fix a typo) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
Sep 19, 2021
Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#87960 (Suggest replacing an inexisting field for an unmentioned field) - rust-lang#88855 (Allow simd_shuffle to accept vectors of any length) - rust-lang#88966 (Check for shadowing issues involving block labels) - rust-lang#88996 (Fix linting when trailing macro expands to a trailing semi) - rust-lang#89017 (fix potential race in AtomicU64 time monotonizer) - rust-lang#89021 (Add a separate error for `dyn Trait` in `const fn`) - rust-lang#89051 (Add intra-doc links and small changes to `std::os` to be more consistent) - rust-lang#89053 (refactor: VecDeques IntoIter fields to private) - rust-lang#89055 (Suggest better place to add call parentheses for method expressions wrapped in parentheses) - rust-lang#89081 (Fix a typo) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
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.
Kobzol commentedSep 17, 2021
I wanted to improve the suggestion a bit to both remove the wrapping parentheses and add call parentheses by both calling
suggest_method_call
and usingmultipart_suggestion
. But I very quickly ran into a problem where multiple overlapping machine applicable suggestions cannot be properly applied together. So I applied the suggestion from the issue and only added the call parentheses directly after the expression.Fixes: #89044
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: