This change replaces various uses of FileSet with either
nothing (when the parameter wasn't really needed) or token.File.
Notably, astutil.Imports was being used to extract the imports
of a file (available at ast.File.Imports), forcing a number
of wrappers to have a FileSet parameter.
Also, simplify various expressions file.Position().Line to file.Line().
Change-Id: I19fe86a18aba50352275f77ed737513744d3930c
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/410366
Run-TryBot: Alan Donovan <adonovan@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
This avoids an import cycle that prevented these wrappers from being
used in the lsppos package.
Change-Id: I9eedd256db983dfcf962edba39e3d4f3a1aabdeb
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/403680
TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <gobot@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Alan Donovan <adonovan@google.com>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Change-Id: I13cf73d7e043dda1a06c28bb09e413a76a68df1f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/391934
Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <gobot@golang.org>
Trust: Hyang-Ah Hana Kim <hyangah@gmail.com>
Run-TryBot: Hyang-Ah Hana Kim <hyangah@gmail.com>
If the selected region is a block statement, gopls
does not return a valid function extraction. This
change adjusts the range to be the statements inside
of the selected block statement.
Fixesgolang/go#48963
Change-Id: I9b1fb5005f961f30c1fa0333cd1f2050ed5eedef
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/357615
Trust: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
This isn't strictly necessary for some of the cases, but it's better to
use it in all cases. Also added a test to ensure that we avoid
(*token.File).Offset in all of gopls--test was probably overkill, but it
was quick to write.
Change-Id: I6dd0126e2211796d5de4e7a389386d7aa81014f0
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/353890
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
Trust: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com>
Edits from the code action "extract variable" wasn't ordered.
The reason this wasn't picked up by the tests (and in fact, the test
failed when edits were in order) is that multiple edits to the same file
was sent as multiple "DocumentChanges" with a single edit each.
By updating ApplyFix() to consolidate edits to the same file into a
single DocumentChange with multiple edits, we avoid the undefined(?)
behaviour of how clients should handle multiple DocumentChanges to the
same file & version.
Fixesgolang/go#47486
Change-Id: Ie4a4718ceb40693b84c014f66c8fc0d221843d88
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/338869
Trust: Pontus Leitzler <leitzler@gmail.com>
Run-TryBot: Pontus Leitzler <leitzler@gmail.com>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
"Extract method" allows users to take a code fragment and move it
to a separate method. This is available if the enclosing function
is a method.
Change-Id: Ib824f6b79b13ca73532223283a050946c90a47e7
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/330070
Trust: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
If new functions or variables need to be created during an extract
call, then we choose the new names. This change makes those names
more descriptive to make the generated names easier to read and
understand.
Before:
cond0, ret0 := fn0()
if cond0 {
return ret0
}
After
shouldReturn, returnValue := newFunction()
if shouldReturn {
return returnValue
}
Change-Id: I44795dc45185c75d5bf65e48378aa54d6c156212
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/326112
Trust: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
When choosing variable names, extract makes sure that the chosen
name does not conflict with any existing variables. By avoiding these
conflicts, we may actually have a conflict with the other names we
are choosing. This change removes this conflict by sending the next
index to use as the suffix of the function name.
Change-Id: Icd81b67db29db2503e214d24ec19ca1065cda090
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/326111
Trust: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Due to the limitations of comments in ast, it is difficult to move
comments. The extract function feature currently does not handle
comments at all. This change instead prints the comments that would
have been lost above the call to the function, so that the user can
easily recover them. Otherwise, it was possible for users to lose
comments and not notice.
Updates golang/go#37170
Change-Id: I1e2d865f5deddefbb0417732490decbdfcde5f3d
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/313211
Trust: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
If there is a return statement that is guaranteed to execute in
the selection to extract to function, then the result of calling
the extracted function can be directly returned.
Updates golang/go#37170
Change-Id: I6454e4107d670e4a1bc9048b2e1073fc80fc78ab
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/312469
Trust: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Suzy Mueller <suzmue@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
The blank identifier is always a local variable. It can't be
a function parameter or a return value.
Fixesgolang/go#44813
Change-Id: Ieca9da35aaa9f5826ab89ded73702bed952e1226
GitHub-Last-Rev: bb7a2353ab64eed7f13bd5b9cb3b85d90b71c0ed
GitHub-Pull-Request: golang/tools#294
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/305429
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
Trust: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
Trust: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com>
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
appliesFn and suggestedFixFn were blocking eliminating the
source.Command dynamic configuration. Remove them, and along the way
refactor command dispatch to align better with the new
internal/lsp/command package.
This involved refactoring the internal/lsp/command.go as follows:
- create a new commandHandler type, which will eventually implement
command.Interface.
- create a commandDeps struct to hold command dependencies.
- move command functionality into methods on commandHandler.
Of these, there are likely to be at least a couple points of controvery:
I decided to store the ctx on the commandHandler, because I preferred it
to threading a context through command.Interface when it isn't needed.
We should revisit this in a later CL.
I opted for a sparse commandDeps struct, rather than either explicit
resolution of dependencies where necessary, or something more abstract
like a proper dependency resolution pattern. It saved enough boilerplate
that I deemed it worthwhile, but didn't want to commit to something more
sophisticated.
Actually switching to the internal/lsp/command package will happen in a
later CL.
Change-Id: I71502fc68f51f1b296bc529ee2885f7547145e92
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/289970
Trust: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com>
Run-TryBot: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Heschi Kreinick <heschi@google.com>
Noticed these when I enabled the "unusedparams" analyzer. Not really
necessary to fix most of them, but seemed harmless.
Change-Id: I77c6e5f7c79f1abb701cd3332642486c34049736
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/263203
Trust: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
gopls-CI: kokoro <noreply+kokoro@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Heschi Kreinick <heschi@google.com>
This CL creates a struct that simplifies some of the extract function
logic. Also, add a test for extraction with an underscore in the
selection (Josh mentioned that this might not work, but it seems too).
Change-Id: If917614a5824e84fb79a07def3eb75f48f10a5b9
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/253277
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com>
Completion is slowly becoming a large part of internal/lsp/source and it
makes sense to move to its own seperate package inside source to make
future refactors easier. As a part of this change, any unexported
members from source required by completion are now exported. Util
functions only required by completion are moved from
internal/lsp/source/util.go to internal/lsp/source/completion/util.go.
Change-Id: I6b7405ec598c910545e649bb0e6aa02ffa653b38
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/253178
Run-TryBot: Danish Dua <danishdua@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Heschi Kreinick <heschi@google.com>
In the previous implementation, we could not extract call expressions
to variables.
Change-Id: I80ee82d7889247a618bd80f40abaa897d15ad20b
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/246761
Run-TryBot: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
Instead of only checking whether the selection is an AST expression in
canExtractVariable, we now also check what kind of AST expression
it is. This limits the frequency of situations where the lightbulb
appears (canExtractVariable succeeds), but nothing can be extracted
(extractVariable fails).
Change-Id: I1e63c982e482bb72df48b414bdb4e8037140afdb
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/247408
Run-TryBot: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
We did not adjust the range in extractFunction(). We only adjusted
the range in canExtractFunction().
Change-Id: Idc1eab775988ab61be6df8b4afd4b1a36a8bb0ff
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/247405
Run-TryBot: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
In the previous implementation, the extracted function would
sometimes include superfluous parameters and return values. It
might also unnecessarily initialize variables. This CL introduces
3 rules to limit this behavior. (1) a variable is not passed as a
parameter to the extracted function if its first use within the
function is its own redefinition. (2) a variable is not returned
from the extracted function if its first use after the function is its
own redefinition. (3) when possible, we redefine variables in the call
expression to the extracted function.
Change-Id: Ideb5a7eff8a1bf462c83271a2f043116ff5d8b76
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/244770
Run-TryBot: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
CL 246757 resulted in an infinite loop because the value of "o" is
never updated.
Change-Id: I79cf265349838de19089c4468128c565a9a3cda3
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/247182
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
Ran into this while debugging another issue.
Change-Id: I154493418c7676a24457a4e11431ad4f0311c07a
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/246757
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
Previously, the suggested fix tests did not properly handle the case
in which one fix contained at least two edits. We also prevent
the server from panicing when we cannot extract the selection.
Change-Id: I38f7b6d871b2f2741349a3fd94fd95b396f5fd33
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/246458
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
In the previous implementation, the initial verification in lsp/command
for whether extract function was relavant to the given range did not
contain much of the initial logic for extract function. This meant
that "canExtractFunction" produced many false positives (i.e. the
lightbulb would appear when it should not have in VSCode). This CL
moves more of the verification process from "extractFunction"
(lsp/source) to "canExtractFunction" (lsp/command).
Change-Id: If2683dc9ac3f4bfa8c3444418cf88edd8cbe73e6
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/245398
Run-TryBot: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
We'd like to call canExtractVariable in extractVariable without
duplicating logic. The same needs to be done for canExtractFunction.
Change-Id: Ia99befabbafffcf13dd3bc12355f9ddb81a71002
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/245135
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Previously, users could not extract code that contained a return
statement. Now, users can extract code with return statements, as long
as the statements are nested within an if, case, or other control
flow statement.
Updates golang/go#37170
Change-Id: I2df52d0241517472decabce3666a32392ff257bd
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/243650
Run-TryBot: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
The logic for extracting a function is quite signficant, and the code
is expensive enough that we should only call it when requested by the
user. This means that we should support extracting through a command
rather than text edits in the code action.
To that end, we create a new struct for commands. Features like extract
variable and extract function can supply functions to determine if they
are relevant to the given range, and if so, to generate their text
edits. source.Analyzers now point to Commands, rather than
SuggestedFixFuncs. The "canExtractVariable" and "canExtractFunction"
functions still need improvements, but I think that can be done in a
follow-up.
Change-Id: I9ec894c5abdbb28505a0f84ad7c76aa50977827a
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/244598
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Heschi Kreinick <heschi@google.com>
Extract function is a code action, similar to extract variable. After
highlighting a selection, if valid, the lightbulb appears to trigger
extraction. The current implementation does not allow users to
extract selections with a return statement.
Updates golang/go#37170
Change-Id: I5fc3b19cf7dbca4407ecf0cc37017661223614d1
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/241957
Run-TryBot: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
I add a code action that triggers upon request of the user. A variable
name is generated manually for the extracted code because the LSP does
not support a user's ability to provide a name.
Change-Id: Id1ec19b49562b7cfbc2cd416378bec9bd021d82f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/tools/+/240182
Run-TryBot: Josh Baum <joshbaum@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Rebecca Stambler <rstambler@golang.org>
Alan Donovan
Robert Findley
Dan Kortschak
Suzy Mueller
Rebecca Stambler
Pontus Leitzler
Shoshin Nikita
Danish Dua
Josh Baum