Unable to find modules generated by proc_macro

[dodomorandi]

I feel slightly bad for posting this, because I really suspect this can be a PITA.

Crates like graphql_client creates a pretty good amount of modules, structs and impls based on graphql files an a few derives. Unfortunately rust-analyzer does not like the situation: it is unable to deduce most of the things, and, even worse, it is unable to detect the modules automatically generated, leaving annoying errors around.

I crated a small dummy repository based on the official github example in order to make testing easier, you can find it here.

Please don't hate me for this matklad and others, I am really a huge fan of your work -- it took me more than two weeks to finally think "I just need to let them know"...

[bjorn3]

You can enable proc-macro support using

{
    "rust-analyzer.cargo.loadOutDirsFromCheck": true,
    "rust-analyzer.procMacro.enable": true,
}

[dodomorandi]

At the beginning I thought that the two parameters (and the fix of the last week, if I remember correctly) would have solved the issue, but unfortunately it does not work.

Did you try the repository I linked? I am assuming (and maybe I am wrong) that the issue should not depend on the editor -- I am using NeoVim with CoC and the related rust-analyzer plugin.

[bjorn3]

I just tested your reproduction repo. I get the same problems with proc macros enabled. @matklad Is it possible that modules defined by proc macros are ignored?

[matklad]

Possible, but not intended.

[jplatte]

In ruma, lots of (probably all) proc-macro-generated types are also not found (both generated by a derive macro and a function-like macro). Both should work, right?

[edwin0cheng]

@dodomorandi I just checked that in current master it works, would you like to test it again ?

[dodomorandi]

@edwin0cheng Thank you for the check! The situation is much better, you are right. I am not sure the completion engine is able to handle things from the modules generated with proc-macro, but I am with NeoVim + CoC, it could also be a different issue.

@jplatte are you seeing the same improvements developing ruma? In that case I think we can close this issue 😊

[jplatte]

Yeah, no issues here anymore 🙂