New error codes #42614

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-06-12T21:54:02Z

Part of #42229.

rust-highfive · 2017-06-12T21:54:14Z

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T21:57:12Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

@@ -4152,6 +4152,252 @@ println!("x: {}, y: {}", variable.x, variable.y);
 For more information see The Rust Book: https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/
 "##,

+E0611: r##"
+Attempted to access to a private field on a tuple-struct.


Should be "Attempted to access a private field on a tuple-struct."

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T21:57:35Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+
+Since the field is private, you have two solutions:
+
+First one: set the field public:


Use "make" instead of "set"

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T21:59:04Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+println!("{}", y.0); // So we can access it directly.
+```
+
+Second one: add a getter function to keep the field private but allow to access


Instead "add a getter function to keep the field private but allow for accessing its value:".

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T22:00:00Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+                     //        on type `Foo`
+```
+
+If a tuple/tuple-struct type has x fields, you can only try to access these x


I'd suggest using "n" here instead of "x" as "n" is commonly used for referring to integer values.

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T22:02:02Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+println!("({}, {}, {}, {})", x.0, x.1, x.2, x.3);
+```
+
+If you want to index an array, use `[]` instead:


Instead "If you want to index into an array, use [] instead:"

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T22:04:24Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+f.method();
+```
+
+However, if you wanted to access a field, of the struct, check if you didn't


Too many commas and incorrect conjugation. Instead "However, if you wanted to access a field of a struct check that the field name is spelled correctly."

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T22:04:44Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+"##,
+
+E0616: r##"
+Attempted to access to a private field on a struct.


Instead "Attempted to access a private field on a struct."

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T22:05:13Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+
+If you want to access this field, you have two options:
+
+First one: set the field public:


Instead: "1) Set the field public:"

I don't like the double-colons on this line.

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T22:05:29Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+println!("{}", f.x); // ok!
+```
+
+Second one: add a getter function:


Instead "2) Add a getter function:"

Susurrus · 2017-06-12T22:06:51Z

src/librustc_typeck/check/mod.rs

+                               idx.node, expr_t).emit();
+        } else {
+            type_error_struct!(self.tcx().sess, expr.span, expr_t, E0613,
+                               "attempted tuple index `{}` on type `{}`, but the type was not a \


I suggest instead: "attempted to access tuple index {} on type {}, but the type is not a tuple or tuple struct"

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-06-12T22:30:32Z

@Susurrus: Thanks a lot for this review! Updated. :)

frewsxcv

Travis found some errors

frewsxcv · 2017-06-13T04:01:58Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+println!("({}, {}, {}, {})", x.0, x.1, x.2, x.3);
+```
+
+If you want to index into an array, use `[]` instead:


index into a slice

would this be more accurate?

I wanted to include both Vec and slices.

In the context of Rust, when I see the term "array" I often think of fixed-length arrays [T; n]. But I don't have a better term on hand that covers the cases here, so this is fine with me.

frewsxcv · 2017-06-13T04:06:35Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

+println!("[{}, {}, {}, {}]", x[0], x[1], x[2], x[3]);
+```
+
+If you want to access a field of a struct, check the field's name wasn't


If you want to access a field of a struct, ensure the field's name is spelled correctly

this sounds better to me, but i don't feel strongly

bors · 2017-06-14T02:58:05Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #42644) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-06-15T08:32:26Z

Rebased.

QuietMisdreavus · 2017-06-15T17:10:01Z

Would it be worth combining E0611 (private field access, tuple struct) and E0616 (private field access, traditional struct)? From the user's perspective, it's the same error, just in different situations.

(EDIT: For any infra team members who see this in a week, I believe imperio just left for a 10-day vacation, so updates on this will likely wait until he's come back from that.)

alexcrichton · 2017-06-22T14:42:03Z

ping @pnkfelix, I think this is ready for a re-review

pnkfelix · 2017-06-22T20:14:49Z

@bors r+

bors · 2017-06-22T20:14:50Z

📌 Commit ee60064 has been approved by pnkfelix

bors · 2017-06-22T21:46:15Z

⌛ Testing commit ee60064 with merge bd62230...

@Susurrus

New error codes Part of #42229. cc @Susurrus @frewsxcv @QuietMisdreavus

bors · 2017-06-23T00:25:28Z

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: pnkfelix
Pushing bd62230 to master...

rust-highfive assigned pnkfelix Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus suggested changes Jun 12, 2017

View reviewed changes

GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the new-error-codes branch from 9c9d0a0 to 8063e12 Compare June 12, 2017 22:30

frewsxcv reviewed Jun 13, 2017

View reviewed changes

GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the new-error-codes branch from 8063e12 to 0a2d5dc Compare June 13, 2017 18:09

arielb1 added the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Jun 13, 2017

GuillaumeGomez added 6 commits June 15, 2017 10:13

Add E0611

302f996

Add E0612

a42f816

Add E0613

e8cbb53

Add E0614

a80db25

Add E0615

5bb58bf

Add E0616

ee60064

GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the new-error-codes branch from 0a2d5dc to ee60064 Compare June 15, 2017 08:30

alexcrichton added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jun 22, 2017

pnkfelix added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 22, 2017

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 22, 2017

Auto merge of #42614 - GuillaumeGomez:new-error-codes, r=pnkfelix

bd62230

New error codes Part of #42229. cc @Susurrus @frewsxcv @QuietMisdreavus

bors mentioned this pull request Jun 22, 2017

Remove most "```ignore" doc tests. #42777

Merged

bors merged commit ee60064 into rust-lang:master Jun 23, 2017

GuillaumeGomez deleted the new-error-codes branch June 24, 2017 18:10

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

New error codes #42614

New error codes #42614

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 12, 2017

rust-highfive commented Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

Susurrus Jun 12, 2017

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 12, 2017

frewsxcv left a comment

frewsxcv Jun 13, 2017

GuillaumeGomez Jun 13, 2017

pnkfelix Jun 22, 2017

frewsxcv Jun 13, 2017

bors commented Jun 14, 2017

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 15, 2017

QuietMisdreavus commented Jun 15, 2017 •

edited

Loading

alexcrichton commented Jun 22, 2017

pnkfelix commented Jun 22, 2017

bors commented Jun 22, 2017

bors commented Jun 22, 2017

bors commented Jun 23, 2017


		Since the field is private, you have two solutions:

		First one: set the field public:


		If you want to access this field, you have two options:

		First one: set the field public:

New error codes #42614

New error codes #42614

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 12, 2017

rust-highfive commented Jun 12, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 12, 2017

frewsxcv left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bors commented Jun 14, 2017

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 15, 2017

QuietMisdreavus commented Jun 15, 2017 • edited Loading

alexcrichton commented Jun 22, 2017

pnkfelix commented Jun 22, 2017

bors commented Jun 22, 2017

bors commented Jun 22, 2017

bors commented Jun 23, 2017

QuietMisdreavus commented Jun 15, 2017 •

edited

Loading