FuelLabs
sway
BlogDocs

Fixes `for` specific error message.

#6758
Comparing
esdrubal/6395
(
f4d9fba
) with
master
(
64d1c6e
)
0%
Improvements
0
Regressions
0
Untouched
22
New
0
Dropped
0
Ignored
0

Benchmarks

Passed

document_symbol
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::document_symbol
+3%
5.5 ms
5.3 ms
semantic_tokens
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::semantic_tokens
+3%
3.2 ms
3.1 ms
code_lens
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::code_lens
+2%
5.3 µs
5.2 µs
hover
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::hover
0%
1.8 ms
1.8 ms
on_enter
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::on_enter
0%
126 µs
125.9 µs
traverse
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/compile.rs::benches::benchmarks::traverse
0%
212.5 ms
212.5 ms
rename
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::rename
0%
46.6 ms
46.6 ms
find_all_references
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::find_all_references
0%
46.6 ms
46.6 ms
highlight
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::highlight
0%
44.1 ms
44.1 ms
parent_decl_at_position
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/token_map.rs::benches::benchmarks::parent_decl_at_position
0%
18.7 ms
18.7 ms
compile
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/compile.rs::benches::benchmarks::compile
0%
5.4 s
5.4 s
idents_at_position
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/token_map.rs::benches::benchmarks::idents_at_position
0%
482 µs
482.1 µs
inlay_hints
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::inlay_hints
0%
18.6 ms
18.6 ms
completion
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::completion
0%
20.9 ms
21 ms
code_action
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::code_action
0%
25.9 ms
25.9 ms
tokens_at_position
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/token_map.rs::benches::benchmarks::tokens_at_position
0%
18.7 ms
18.7 ms
token_at_position
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/token_map.rs::benches::benchmarks::token_at_position
0%
1.7 ms
1.7 ms
prepare_rename
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::prepare_rename
0%
1.7 ms
1.7 ms
did_change_with_caching
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/compile.rs::benches::benchmarks::did_change_with_caching
0%
506.6 ms
507.3 ms
goto_definition
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::goto_definition
0%
1.7 ms
1.7 ms
tokens_for_file
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/token_map.rs::benches::benchmarks::tokens_for_file
0%
1.7 ms
1.7 ms
format
sway-lsp/benches/lsp_benchmarks/requests.rs::benches::benchmarks::format
-1%
460.4 ms
465.5 ms

Commits

Click on a commit to change the comparison range
Base
master
64d1c6e
0%
Fixes for specific error message. The added test case was emitting a wrong/confusing error message, because a for loop only gets type-checked in its desugared form, as a while loop. The error message was `A while loop's loop body cannot implicitly return a value. Try assigning it to a mutable variable declared outside of the loop instead.` Corrected to: `A for loop's loop body cannot implicitly return a value. Try assigning it to a mutable variable declared outside of the loop instead.`
f4d9fba
16 hours ago
by esdrubal
© 2024 CodSpeed Technology
Home Terms PrivacyDocs