Fix incorrect range uses in missing_fields quick fixes

Author: Veykril

crates/ide-diagnostics/src/handlers/missing_fields.rs

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ use syntax::{
     ast::{self, make},
     AstNode, SyntaxNode, SyntaxNodePtr,
 };
-use text_edit::TextEdit;
+use text_edit::{TextEdit, TextRange};
 
 use crate::{fix, Diagnostic, DiagnosticCode, DiagnosticsContext};
 
@@ -40,12 +40,17 @@ pub(crate) fn missing_fields(ctx: &DiagnosticsContext<'_>, d: &hir::MissingField
             .map(SyntaxNodePtr::from)
             .unwrap_or_else(|| d.field_list_parent.into()),
     );
+    let range = ptr.value.text_range();
 
     Diagnostic::new_with_syntax_node_ptr(ctx, DiagnosticCode::RustcHardError("E0063"), message, ptr)
-        .with_fixes(fixes(ctx, d))
+        .with_fixes(fixes(ctx, d, range))
 }
 
-fn fixes(ctx: &DiagnosticsContext<'_>, d: &hir::MissingFields) -> Option<Vec<Assist>> {
+fn fixes(
+    ctx: &DiagnosticsContext<'_>,
+    d: &hir::MissingFields,
+    range: TextRange,
+) -> Option<Vec<Assist>> {
     // Note that although we could add a diagnostics to
     // fill the missing tuple field, e.g :
     // `struct A(usize);`
@@ -60,27 +65,27 @@ fn fixes(ctx: &DiagnosticsContext<'_>, d: &hir::MissingFields) -> Option<Vec<Ass
     let current_module =
         ctx.sema.scope(d.field_list_parent.to_node(&root).syntax()).map(|it| it.module());
 
-    let build_text_edit = |parent_syntax, new_syntax: &SyntaxNode, old_syntax| {
-        let edit = {
+    let build_text_edit = |new_syntax: &SyntaxNode, old_syntax| {
+        let (file_id, edit) = {
+            let range = ctx.sema.original_range_opt(old_syntax)?;
             let mut builder = TextEdit::builder();
             if d.file.is_macro() {
                 // we can't map the diff up into the macro input unfortunately, as the macro loses all
                 // whitespace information so the diff wouldn't be applicable no matter what
                 // This has the downside that the cursor will be moved in macros by doing it without a diff
                 // but that is a trade off we can make.
                 // FIXME: this also currently discards a lot of whitespace in the input... we really need a formatter here
-                let range = ctx.sema.original_range_opt(old_syntax)?;
                 builder.replace(range.range, new_syntax.to_string());
             } else {
                 algo::diff(old_syntax, new_syntax).into_text_edit(&mut builder);
             }
-            builder.finish()
+            (range.file_id, builder.finish())
         };
         Some(vec![fix(
             "fill_missing_fields",
             "Fill struct fields",
-            SourceChange::from_text_edit(d.file.original_file(ctx.sema.db), edit),
-            ctx.sema.original_range(parent_syntax).range,
+            SourceChange::from_text_edit(file_id, edit),
+            range,
         )])
     };
 
@@ -143,11 +148,7 @@ fn fixes(ctx: &DiagnosticsContext<'_>, d: &hir::MissingFields) -> Option<Vec<Ass
                 );
                 new_field_list.add_field(field.clone_for_update());
             }
-            build_text_edit(
-                field_list_parent.syntax(),
-                new_field_list.syntax(),
-                old_field_list.syntax(),
-            )
+            build_text_edit(new_field_list.syntax(), old_field_list.syntax())
         }
         Either::Right(field_list_parent) => {
             let missing_fields = ctx.sema.record_pattern_missing_fields(field_list_parent);
@@ -160,11 +161,7 @@ fn fixes(ctx: &DiagnosticsContext<'_>, d: &hir::MissingFields) -> Option<Vec<Ass
                 ));
                 new_field_list.add_field(field.clone_for_update());
             }
-            build_text_edit(
-                field_list_parent.syntax(),
-                new_field_list.syntax(),
-                old_field_list.syntax(),
-            )
+            build_text_edit(new_field_list.syntax(), old_field_list.syntax())
         }
     }
 }