Add E0609 by GuillaumeGomez · Pull Request #42585 · rust-lang/rust

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-06-10T19:20:35Z

Part of #42229.

cc @Susurrus

rust-highfive · 2017-06-10T19:20:46Z

r? @pnkfelix

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

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T01:05:47Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

Maybe "Attempted to access a non-existent field in a struct" reads better?

What about "An attempt to access a non-existent field in a struct"?

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T01:05:59Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

"misspell"

Remove the "if" as well.

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-06-11T10:35:15Z

Updated.

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T15:57:05Z

I really don't like the phrasing "An attempt ... was performed". It reads awkwardly. I think using "Attempted to ..." reads better overall.

Additionally it appears that this error covers two situations: One where they improperly use field syntax on a type (currently non-structs-or-tuples) and another error when the struct does not contain the given field. And my understanding is that error is separate from when that field is private as well. I think these errors would be more clear if E0609 was split into two errors: one for when it's invalid for the type to have field access performed on it and another for when a struct or tuple doesn't have the field being referenced.

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-06-11T20:44:59Z

I splitted the error into two.

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T20:50:45Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

"check that you didn't misspell the field's name or that the field actually exists"

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T20:51:01Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T20:55:17Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

I don't know how the user would accidentally access a field of a variable when coding. I would think the most likely reason would be they a) didn't know the datatype of the variable they used or b) accidentally used the wrong variable. I don't know if suggesting the user looks at structs will be helpful in them resolving this error. I think this extra description may be unnecessary.

In case you want to keep it, I'd reword the second sentence as it reads as being very informal. Maybe instead "To access data via named fields, struct types are used."?

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T20:55:43Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

"call" is usually reserved for use with functions/methods. I'd suggest "access" instead.

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T20:56:21Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

"go read" sounds like a derogatory command. I'd suggest "see" instead (and drop the comma).

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T20:58:40Z

src/librustc_typeck/check/mod.rs

I'd suggest replacing the comma with "and"

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-06-11T21:21:42Z

Updated.

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T23:21:30Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

Remove the comma as it's unnecessary.

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T23:22:04Z

src/librustc_typeck/diagnostics.rs

Remove "was performed", the sentence doesn't make sense given that it now starts with "Attempted"

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-06-11T23:47:12Z

Updated.

Susurrus · 2017-06-11T23:48:36Z

LGTM 👍

GuillaumeGomez · 2017-06-11T23:50:59Z

@bors: r=Susurrus

bors · 2017-06-11T23:51:00Z

📌 Commit 2f37894 has been approved by Susurrus

bors · 2017-06-11T23:51:10Z

⌛ Testing commit 2f37894 with merge 29ef412...

@Susurrus

Add E0609 Part of #42229. cc @Susurrus

bors · 2017-06-12T02:19:54Z

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: Susurrus
Pushing 29ef412 to master...

rust-highfive assigned pnkfelix Jun 10, 2017

Susurrus suggested changes Jun 11, 2017

View reviewed changes

GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the E0609 branch from c4c6cd7 to ed54773 Compare June 11, 2017 10:35

Mark-Simulacrum added the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Jun 11, 2017

Add E0609

f4dd365

GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the E0609 branch from ed54773 to 60cfa9e Compare June 11, 2017 20:44

Susurrus suggested changes Jun 11, 2017

View reviewed changes

GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the E0609 branch from 60cfa9e to be79d0c Compare June 11, 2017 21:21

Susurrus suggested changes Jun 11, 2017

View reviewed changes

Add E0610

2f37894

GuillaumeGomez force-pushed the E0609 branch from be79d0c to 2f37894 Compare June 11, 2017 23:47

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2017

Auto merge of #42585 - GuillaumeGomez:E0609, r=Susurrus

29ef412

Add E0609 Part of #42229. cc @Susurrus

bors merged commit 2f37894 into rust-lang:master Jun 12, 2017

This was referenced Jun 12, 2017

Create more error codes #42519

Merged

E0608 #42568

Merged

GuillaumeGomez deleted the E0609 branch June 12, 2017 08:48

Uh oh!

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 10, 2017

Uh oh!

rust-highfive commented Jun 10, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 11, 2017

Uh oh!

Susurrus commented Jun 11, 2017

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 11, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 11, 2017

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 11, 2017

Uh oh!

Susurrus commented Jun 11, 2017

Uh oh!

GuillaumeGomez commented Jun 11, 2017

Uh oh!

bors commented Jun 11, 2017

Uh oh!

bors commented Jun 11, 2017

Uh oh!

bors commented Jun 12, 2017

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants