add span to struct pattern rest (..)

[Erk-]

Struct pattern rest (..) did not retain span information compared to normal fields. This patch adds span information for it.

The motivation of this patch comes from when I implemented this PR for Clippy: rust-lang/rust-clippy#15000 (comment)

It is possible to get the span of the Et cetera in a bit roundabout way, but I thought this would be nicer.

[rustbot]

r? @spastorino

rustbot has assigned @spastorino.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in src/tools/rustfmt

cc @rust-lang/rustfmt

[rustbot]

Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy

cc @rust-lang/clippy

[samueltardieu]

It looks like this might be good for consistency, but the span doesn't seem to be used anywhere (except through .is_some() or .is_none()). A timer run would be useful to see how the 11%/17% size increase of Pat/PatKind affects performances.

[y21]

I assume this is "needed" for rust-lang/rust-clippy#15000 (comment)? Would probably be useful to put this in the PR body for context/motivation if that's the case

[Erk-]

I assume this is "needed" for rust-lang/rust-clippy#15000 (comment)? Would probably be useful to put this in the PR body for context/motivation if that's the case

Yeah that was my main motivation, looking throught the changes I made here I can at least spot one other location in Clippy where it could be useful to make better lints (rest_pat_in_fully_bound_structs).

I will add the motivation to the main body above as well.

[compiler-errors]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: bb08434 (bb0843444108618334e794c7f681dc2bd1bf208f, parent: 6d6a08cf590ec26296447b8d2cf2329bb64c303a)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (bb08434): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.3%, secondary 1.3%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.3%	[1.2%, 1.4%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.4%	[2.0%, 2.8%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.9%	[-0.9%, -0.9%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	1.3%	[1.2%, 1.4%]	2

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 468.355s -> 466.756s (-0.34%)
Artifact size: 378.17 MiB -> 378.15 MiB (-0.00%)

[compiler-errors]

Please squash into one commit

[compiler-errors]

I'm fine with adding this new span to the AST + HIR. The size changes don't look significant.

@bors r+ rollup

[bors]

📌 Commit 03ab224 has been approved by compiler-errors

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[jhpratt]

@bors r- #145831 (comment)

[rustbot]

Changes to the size of AST and/or HIR nodes.

cc @nnethercote