Closed tesselode closed 2 months ago
This is, technically, a rust-analyzer bug, as is any time rust-analyzer
fires a lint and rustc
does not. The problem is that RA doesn't implement the exact same rules for suppressing lints in macros. (I'd link an RA bug, but after searching there doesn't seem to be one that covers exactly this case of “the implicit lint suppression should have done it” — all the bugs currently open seem to be about #[allow]
s getting ignored.
(I do think it's reasonable to apply a workaround, though, since this is a long-standing problem.)
By the way, I didn't know that anyone else was using exhaust
yet — is there a way I could have gotten your feedback on the 0.2 changes before I published the release (or any feedback on the direction of development in general)?
You can ping me on the Rust GameDev discord if you want! I'm @tesselode there. I don't have any strong opinions on the v0.2 changes, since I don't understand what new use case they enable.
When using Rust Analyzer, I get the following warnings:
__ExhaustFactoryState_Cool
should have CamelCase name, e.g.ExhaustFactoryStateCool
__ExhaustIterState_Cool
should have CamelCase name, e.g.ExhaustIterStateCool