Fix span of visibility

[topecongiro]

This PR

1. adds a closing parenthesis to the span of Visibility::Crate (e.g. pub(crate)). The current span only covers pub(crate.
2. adds a span field to Visibility::Restricted. This span covers the entire visibility expression (e.g. pub (in self)). Currently all we can have is a span for Path.

This PR is motivated by the bug found in rustfmt (rust-lang/rustfmt#2398).

The first change is a strict improvement IMHO. The second change may not be desirable, as it adds a field which is currently not used by the compiler.

[rust-highfive]

r? @michaelwoerister

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

[petrochenkov]

IIRC, the whole visibility span is used in couple of places, but it's retrieved from codemap when necessary rather than precomputed.
I'd rather add a span field to Visibility itself, but it's a larger refactoring.

r=me without the second commit.
@bors delegate+

[bors]

✌️ @topecongiro can now approve this pull request

[topecongiro]

@petrochenkov Thank you for your review!

If adding a span filed to Visibility itself is ok, I would rather do that in this PR. I will see if I can do it.

[topecongiro]

Or, rather than adding a span field to Visibility, use Spanned? E.g.

pubtypeVisibility = Spanned<VisibilityKind>;#[derive(Clone,PartialEq,Eq,RustcEncodable,RustcDecodable,Hash,Debug)]pubenumVisibilityKind{Public,Crate(CrateSugar),Restricted{path:P<Path>,id:NodeId},Inherited,}

[petrochenkov]

@topecongiro
The rule of thumb is that Spanned is used with enums because we cannot add fields to them directly and additional span field is used with structs, so Spanned would be okay in this case.

[petrochenkov]

Dummy spans should not be used, unless completely unavoidable.
In most cases during expansion spans for generated code can be inherited from something. In this case item.span is used for the path and for the extern crate item, it can be used for visibility as well.

[petrochenkov]

Dummy spans should not be used, unless completely unavoidable.

It's probably not so dire for visibilities because they don't have hygiene, but it's still desirable to use some valid spans when possible.

[topecongiro]

@petrochenkov Thank you for your advice!

Is it acceptable to use 'empty' span like the following, rather than item.span? I think it makes easier to handle comments in rustfmt and reflects the syntactic structure of source code more accurately (as Inherited visibility has no keyword).

Span{hi: item.span.lo(), ..item.span}

[petrochenkov]

Yes, that would be even better.
(I was concerned about item.span.lo pointing to the location before item attributes, but it looks like this is not the case.)

[topecongiro]

Updated and rebased against the master to resolve conflicts.

[petrochenkov]

r=me after removing unintended submodule updates and fixing tidy.
@bors delegate+

[bors]

✌️ @topecongiro can now approve this pull request

[topecongiro]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 7d51391 has been approved by topecongiro

[topecongiro]

@bors r-

Had to fix tidy.

[petrochenkov]

Travis fails, unit tests in libsyntax need updating.

[emilyalbini]

Hi @topecongiro, we haven't heard from you on this in a while! There are some broken tests (#47799 (comment)), could you update them so the PR can be merged?

[topecongiro]

Updated broken tests. I am sorry that this took a long time to get fixed.

[petrochenkov]

Timeout on i686-pc-windows-msvc again! Strange, but let's try again.
@bors retry

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 8e9fa57 with merge b2642ba62d41570201a9d85e7f4df133590e5fed...

[Manishearth]

@bors clean

(included in the rollup)

[bors]

💥 Test timed out

[Manishearth]

@bors r=petrochenkov retry clean

[bors]

💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.

[bors]

📌 Commit 8e9fa57 has been approved by petrochenkov

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 8e9fa57 with merge 063deba...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: petrochenkov
Pushing 063deba to master...

[kennytm]

Clippy is broken by this PR, cc @Manishearth@llogiq@mcarton@oli-obk.

Details

[01:21:49] Compiling clippy_lints v0.0.186 (file:///checkout/src/tools/clippy/clippy_lints)
[01:21:56] error[E0599]: no associated item named `Public` found for type `syntax::codemap::Spanned<syntax::ast::VisibilityKind>` in the current scope
[01:21:56] --> tools/clippy/clippy_lints/src/enum_variants.rs:263:36
[01:21:56] |
[01:21:56] 263 | if item.vis == Visibility::Public {
[01:21:56] | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ associated item not found in `syntax::codemap::Spanned<syntax::ast::VisibilityKind>`
[01:21:56] [01:21:56] error[E0599]: no associated item named `Public` found for type `syntax::codemap::Spanned<syntax::ast::VisibilityKind>` in the current scope
[01:21:56] --> tools/clippy/clippy_lints/src/enum_variants.rs:288:17
[01:21:56] |
[01:21:56] 288 | Visibility::Public => PUB_ENUM_VARIANT_NAMES,
[01:21:56] | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ associated item not found in `syntax::codemap::Spanned<syntax::ast::VisibilityKind>`
[01:21:56] [01:21:56] error[E0599]: no associated item named `Public` found for type `syntax::codemap::Spanned<syntax::ast::VisibilityKind>` in the current scope
[01:21:56] --> tools/clippy/clippy_lints/src/enum_variants.rs:263:36
[01:21:56] |
[01:21:56] 263 | if item.vis == Visibility::Public {
[01:21:56] | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ associated item not found in `syntax::codemap::Spanned<syntax::ast::VisibilityKind>`
[01:21:56] [01:21:56] error[E0599]: no associated item named `Public` found for type `syntax::codemap::Spanned<syntax::ast::VisibilityKind>` in the current scope
[01:21:56] --> tools/clippy/clippy_lints/src/enum_variants.rs:288:17
[01:21:56] |
[01:21:56] 288 | Visibility::Public => PUB_ENUM_VARIANT_NAMES,
[01:21:56] | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ associated item not found in `syntax::codemap::Spanned<syntax::ast::VisibilityKind>`
[01:21:56] [01:21:59] error: aborting due to 2 previous errors
[01:21:59] [01:21:59] error: Could not compile `clippy_lints`.
[01:21:59] warning: build failed, waiting for other jobs to finish...
[01:21:59] error: aborting due to 2 previous errors