fix: Use ident span when recovering comments in non-shorthand PatField - #7004
Merged
Conversation
…ield` Fixes 6984 Using the `pat` span wasn't correct because it contained the field identifier, which caused code duplication when recovering comments between the attribute and the pattern struct field.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
ytmimi
commented
Aug 1, 2026
Comment on lines
+5
to
+7
| #[cfg(feature = "diagnostics")] | ||
| // comment between attribute and field | ||
| field_name_baz: _, |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pre-existing indent bug for style_edition <= 2024. Adding this test case to show that code duplication is avoided in earlier style editions.
jieyouxu
added
the
F-impacts-stable-but-broken-formatting
rustbot
added
release-notes
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #6984
Using the
patspan wasn't correct because it contained the field identifier, which caused code duplication when recovering comments between the attribute and the pattern struct field.