bug#61302: 29.0.60; rust-ts-mode does not show function-invocation on field-properties

[Randy Taylor <dev@rjt.dev>]

On Saturday, February 18th, 2023 at 19:13, Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> wrote:
> On 19/02/2023 01:31, Randy Taylor wrote:
> 
> > Fix one bug, introduce another 😉.
> > 
> > Any use declaration tail (I guess that's the lingo we're using?) should not have a face applied to it if it's lowercase.
> 
> 
> I guess we do. Unless you have better naming suggestions ;-)

Nope, I like it :).

> 
> > For example:
> > `use deeply::nested::function as other_function;`
> > function should not have any face applied to it.
> > 
> > `use a::b::{C, d, e::F, g::h::I, g::h::i};`
> > i should not have any face applied to it.
> > 
> > Only if they are capitalized should we give them a face: font-lock-type-face.
> > As it stands now, they are all font-lock-constant-face.
> > 
> > The previous patch was perfect except for the missing use_as_clause queries - if I add those back, I think everything is good unless I'm missing something.
> 
> 
> Thanks for catching that, I missed one treesit-node-parent call when
> inlining a function.

Looks good now!

> 
> > > > The variable feature is highlighting some things incorrectly (it was before too, but I think it's a little worse now).
> > > > Adding these to rust-ts-mode--variable-p takes care of the issues that I see.
> > > > `((equal "extern_crate_declaration" parent-type) nil) ((equal "lifetime" parent-type) nil) ((equal "scoped_type_identifier" parent-type) nil) ((equal "use_as_clause" parent-type) nil) ((equal "use_list" parent-type) nil)`
> > > 
> > > This should be taken care of by the new approach (enumeration of all
> > > allowed parent types).
> > > Missing:
> > > (closure_parameters (identifier) @font-lock-variable-name-face)
> 
> 
> This one goes into the 'definition' feature. I just made that change
> today in emacs-29, check it out.
> 
> > (field_initializer value: (identifier) @font-lock-variable-name-face)
> 
> 
> Thanks, added. Also added unary_expression.
> 
> > Would it be possible to alphabetize the queries in the variable feature BTW? It makes it easier to see what's there/missing.
> > And you know I like things alphabetized 😉.
> 
> 
> No problem! I generally like to group by functionality, but alphabetic
> is fine, and this case seems particularly suited to it.
> 
> See the revised in attachment.

Ship it!

Thanks for working on this.