This causes the function to return true and the checks to pass, but it
requires more thinking - how do we deal with pub(crate) in the current system?
Should we simply treat it as a pub item in the current crate, but export it as
a private item in the metadata?
gcc/rust/ChangeLog:
* ast/rust-item.h: Fix `Visibility::has_path()` implementation.
* checks/errors/privacy/rust-visibility-resolver.cc
(VisibilityResolver::resolve_module_path): Check if we are dealing with pub(crate) properly.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* rust/compile/privacy8.rs: New test.
}
// Returns whether a visibility has a path
- bool has_path () const { return !(is_error ()) && vis_type == PUB_IN_PATH; }
+ bool has_path () const { return !is_error () && vis_type >= PUB_CRATE; }
// Returns whether visibility is public or not.
bool is_public () const { return vis_type != PRIV && !is_error (); }
HirId ref;
rust_assert (mappings.lookup_node_to_hir (ref_node_id, &ref));
+ auto crate = mappings.get_ast_crate (mappings.get_current_crate ());
+
+ // we may be dealing with pub(crate)
+ if (ref_node_id == crate.get_node_id ())
+ // FIXME: What do we do here? There isn't a DefId for the Crate, so can we
+ // actually do anything?
+ // We basically want to return true always but just when exporting export
+ // these items as private?
+ return true;
+
auto module = mappings.lookup_module (ref);
if (!module)
{
--- /dev/null
+pub(crate) struct Foo; // { dg-warning "struct is never constructed" }