Skip to content

Make error message for missing fields with .. and without .. more consistent #139024

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 8, 2025

Conversation

compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

When .. is not present, we say "missing field bar in initializer", but when it is present we say "missing mandatory field bar". I don't see why the primary error message should change, b/c the root cause is the same.

Let's harmonize these error messages and instead use a label to explain that .. is required b/c it's not defaulted.

r? estebank

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Mar 27, 2025
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

r? compiler

@rustbot rustbot assigned lcnr and unassigned estebank Apr 7, 2025
@compiler-errors compiler-errors force-pushed the tweak-default-value-err branch from 967ea6a to 250b848 Compare April 7, 2025 20:45
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r=lcnr rollup

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 7, 2025

📌 Commit 250b848 has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors 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 Apr 7, 2025
Zalathar added a commit to Zalathar/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2025
…e-err, r=lcnr

Make error message for missing fields with `..` and without `..` more consistent

When `..` is not present, we say "missing field `bar` in initializer", but when it is present we say "missing mandatory field `bar`". I don't see why the primary error message should change, b/c the root cause is the same.

Let's harmonize these error messages and instead use a label to explain that `..` is required b/c it's not defaulted.

r? estebank
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2025
…errors

Rollup of 19 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#138676 (Implement overflow for infinite implied lifetime bounds)
 - rust-lang#139024 (Make error message for missing fields with `..` and without `..` more consistent)
 - rust-lang#139098 (Tell LLVM about impossible niche tags)
 - rust-lang#139124 (compiler: report error when trait object type param reference self)
 - rust-lang#139321 (Update to new rinja version (askama))
 - rust-lang#139346 (Don't construct preds w escaping bound vars in `diagnostic_hir_wf_check`)
 - rust-lang#139386 (make it possible to use stage0 libtest on compiletest)
 - rust-lang#139421 (Fix trait upcasting to dyn type with no principal when there are projections)
 - rust-lang#139468 (Don't call `Span::with_parent` on the good path in `has_stashed_diagnostic`)
 - rust-lang#139476 (rm `RegionInferenceContext::var_infos`)
 - rust-lang#139481 (Add job summary links to post-merge report)
 - rust-lang#139485 (compiletest: Stricter parsing for diagnostic kinds)
 - rust-lang#139490 (Update some comment/docs related to "extern intrinsic" removal)
 - rust-lang#139491 (Update books)
 - rust-lang#139496 (Revert r-a changes of rust-lang#139455)
 - rust-lang#139500 (document panic behavior of Vec::resize and Vec::resize_with)
 - rust-lang#139501 (Fix stack overflow in exhaustiveness due to recursive HIR opaque hidden types)
 - rust-lang#139504 (add missing word in doc comment)
 - rust-lang#139507 (compiletest: Trim whitespace from environment variable names)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2025
Rollup of 10 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#138676 (Implement overflow for infinite implied lifetime bounds)
 - rust-lang#139024 (Make error message for missing fields with `..` and without `..` more consistent)
 - rust-lang#139098 (Tell LLVM about impossible niche tags)
 - rust-lang#139124 (compiler: report error when trait object type param reference self)
 - rust-lang#139321 (Update to new rinja version (askama))
 - rust-lang#139346 (Don't construct preds w escaping bound vars in `diagnostic_hir_wf_check`)
 - rust-lang#139386 (make it possible to use stage0 libtest on compiletest)
 - rust-lang#139421 (Fix trait upcasting to dyn type with no principal when there are projections)
 - rust-lang#139464 (Allow for reparsing failure when reparsing a pasted metavar.)
 - rust-lang#139490 (Update some comment/docs related to "extern intrinsic" removal)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 6257825 into rust-lang:master Apr 8, 2025
6 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.88.0 milestone Apr 8, 2025
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2025
Rollup merge of rust-lang#139024 - compiler-errors:tweak-default-value-err, r=lcnr

Make error message for missing fields with `..` and without `..` more consistent

When `..` is not present, we say "missing field `bar` in initializer", but when it is present we say "missing mandatory field `bar`". I don't see why the primary error message should change, b/c the root cause is the same.

Let's harmonize these error messages and instead use a label to explain that `..` is required b/c it's not defaulted.

r? estebank
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants