-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15k
"try using a variant of the expected type" suggesting a peculiar syntax #65494
Copy link
Copy link
Closed
Labels
A-diagnosticsArea: Messages for errors, warnings, and lintsArea: Messages for errors, warnings, and lintsA-suggestion-diagnosticsArea: Suggestions generated by the compiler applied by `cargo fix`Area: Suggestions generated by the compiler applied by `cargo fix`C-enhancementCategory: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.Category: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.T-compilerRelevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
A-diagnosticsArea: Messages for errors, warnings, and lintsArea: Messages for errors, warnings, and lintsA-suggestion-diagnosticsArea: Suggestions generated by the compiler applied by `cargo fix`Area: Suggestions generated by the compiler applied by `cargo fix`C-enhancementCategory: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.Category: An issue proposing an enhancement or a PR with one.T-compilerRelevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Type
Fields
Give feedbackNo fields configured for issues without a type.
Hi,
I've got following code:
(playground link)
The suggested
<Foo>::new()syntax is valid, but - quite frankly - spooky (and it seems to be this way from the very beginning of this feature). Could it suggest justFoo::new()?I'd like to tackle this myself, but I'd need at least a hint where to look :-)