summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/tests/rustdoc-js-std/parser-errors.js
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorbors <bors@rust-lang.org>2023-04-09 20:57:06 +0000
committerbors <bors@rust-lang.org>2023-04-09 20:57:06 +0000
commit696aaad58c57a589f6fb2ecff5bae2eec581cb71 (patch)
treee7e3dba6b267106715eac55d28834b6dec753cc8 /tests/rustdoc-js-std/parser-errors.js
parent39bf7777aab9ac1f6b0802cd52cd91d6e021aa91 (diff)
parent3b38dd91126a647334af07d772ad809422918e5a (diff)
downloadrust-696aaad58c57a589f6fb2ecff5bae2eec581cb71.tar.gz
Auto merge of #109760 - MaciejWas:struct-tuple-field-names-suggestion, r=jackh726
Better diagnostic when pattern matching tuple structs Fixes #108284 When trying to pattern match a tuple struct we might get a flawed error message if there are missing fields. E.g. ``` let x = Foo(100, 200); if let Foo { 0: bar } = x { ... } ``` Produces this error: ``` error[E0769]: tuple variant `Foo` written as struct variant --> hello.rs:5:12 | 5 | if let Foo { 0: foo } = x { | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | help: use the tuple variant pattern syntax instead | 5 | if let Foo(_, _) = x { | ~~~~~~ ``` Which doesn't highlight that we can still use the struct syntax but we need to fill missing fields. This pr changes this error to: ``` error[E0027]: pattern does not mention field `1` --> hello.rs:5:12 | 5 | if let Foo { 0: foo } = x { | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ missing field `1` | help: include the missing field in the pattern | 5 | if let Foo { 0: foo, 1: _ } = x { | ~~~~~~~~ help: if you don't care about this missing field, you can explicitly ignore it | 5 | if let Foo { 0: foo, .. } = x { | ~~~~~~ ```
Diffstat (limited to 'tests/rustdoc-js-std/parser-errors.js')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions