-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 628
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.
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
lsp: Rename components, structs and enum from places where they are used #7305
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
... and their usages and imports/exports
It mostly works when testing from VSCode, but it still has a couple of rough edges where the tests pass, but VSCode does not want to trigger. I'll poke at it a bit more tomorrow. |
.child_token(SyntaxKind::StringLiteral) | ||
.map(|t| t.text().trim_matches('"').to_string())?; | ||
|
||
if import == "std-widgets.slint" || import == "std-widgets.s60" { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if import == "std-widgets.slint" || import == "std-widgets.s60" { | |
if import == "std-widgets.slint" { |
It was called sixtyfps_widgets.60
but we no longer support that
Foo /* <- TEST_ME_9 */ { } | ||
} | ||
|
||
function Foo(Foo: int) { Foo + 1; } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The test should also test that none of the Foo
here matches with a component.
} | ||
|
||
impl DeclarationNodeQuery { | ||
fn new(node: SyntaxNode) -> Option<Self> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This seems like it is an incomplete duplication of language::token_info::token_info()
That function also do the lookup and tell you the exact type this is referring to.
So I think it would be a better candidate.
I started to pull out a bit of code from here into easier to review portions in separate PRs... |
This has pretty decent test coverage, but it is more involved than the first and it is admittedly a bit of a mess in the PR...
I was test driven and forgot to stop along the way ;-)