Skip to content

Suggests to initialize struct with private fields, instead of looking for typo #39226

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
nagisa opened this issue Jan 21, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

Suggests to initialize struct with private fields, instead of looking for typo #39226

nagisa opened this issue Jan 21, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@nagisa
Copy link
Member

nagisa commented Jan 21, 2017

I typo’d handle (local variable) with Handle (type with private fields I have no access to). Would have expected rustc to not emit such a note and maybe look for typos instead.

error[E0423]: expected value, found struct `Handle`
   |
73 |                     handle: Handle,
   |                             ^^^^^^ did you mean `Handle { /* fields */ }`?
@Freyskeyd
Copy link
Contributor

I agree. I think it's better to look for context before looking for Struct or any other Expression.

I will try to modify check order.

@Freyskeyd Freyskeyd mentioned this issue Jan 25, 2017
Merged
bors added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 29, 2017
@bors
Auto merge of #39291 - Freyskeyd:check_context_E0423, r=petrochenkov
b4d3ed6 
Checker:: Execute levenshtein before other context checking

As explain [here]() i think it's better to check for a miss typing before checking context dependent help.

```rust
struct Handle {}

struct Something {
     handle: Handle
}

fn main() {
     let handle: Handle = Handle {};

     let s: Something = Something {
         // Checker detect an error and propose a solution with `Handle { /* ... */ }`
         // but it's a miss typing of `handle`
         handle: Handle
    };
}
```

Ping: @nagisa for #39226

Signed-off-by: Freyskeyd <simon.paitrault@gmail.com>
@Freyskeyd
Copy link
Contributor

This PR can be closed I think: refer to #39291

cc @nagisa

@nagisa
Copy link
Member Author

nagisa commented May 2, 2017

Great!

@nagisa nagisa closed this as completed May 2, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@nagisa @Freyskeyd