parser: `token` -> `normalized_token`, `nonnormalized_token` -> `token`
So, after https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/69006, its follow-ups and an attempt to remove `Parser::prev_span` I came to the conclusion that the unnormalized token and its span is what you want in most cases, so it should be default.
Normalization only makes difference in few cases where we are checking against `token::Ident` or `token::Lifetime` specifically.
This PR uses `normalized_token` for those cases.
Using normalization explicitly means that people writing code should remember about `NtIdent` and `NtLifetime` in general. (That is alleviated by the fact that `token.ident()` and `fn parse_ident_*` are already written.)
Remembering about `NtIdent`, was, however, already the case, kind of, because the implicit normalization was performed only for the current/previous token, but not for things like `look_ahead`.
As a result, most of token classification methods in `token.rs` already take `NtIdent` into account (this PR fixes a few pre-existing minor mistakes though).
The next step is removing `normalized(_prev)_token` entirely and replacing it with `token.ident()` (mostly) and `token.normalize()` (occasionally).
I want to make it a separate PR for that and run it though perf.
`normalized_token` filled on every bump has both a potential to avoid repeated normalization, and to do unnecessary work in advance (it probably doesn't matter anyway, the normalization is very cheap).
r? @Centril
Currently, we emit a "try adding a comma" suggestion if a comma is
missing in a struct definition. However, we emit no such suggestion if a
comma is missing in a struct initializer.
This commit adds a "try adding a comma" suggestion when we don't find a
comma during the parsing of a struct initializer field.
The change to `src/test/ui/parser/removed-syntax-with-1.stderr` isn't
great, but I don't see a good way of avoiding it.
Account for type params on method without parentheses
Account for those type parameters in the structured suggestion when forgetting to call method:
```
error[E0615]: attempted to take value of method `collect` on type `std::vec::IntoIter<_>`
--> $DIR/method-missing-parentheses.rs:2:32
|
LL | let _ = vec![].into_iter().collect::<usize>;
| ^^^^^^^---------
| |
| help: use parentheses to call the method: `collect::<usize>()`
```
Add suggestions when encountering chained comparisons
Ideally, we'd also prevent the type error, which is just extra noise, but that will require moving the error from the parser, and I think the suggestion makes things clear enough for now.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65659.
Refactor expression parsing thoroughly
Based on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/66994 together with which this has refactored basically the entirety of `expr.rs`.
r? @estebank
Mazdak Farrokhzad