fix(rustfmt): fix struct field formatting with doc comments present

[tharun208]

Fixes #5215

[ytmimi]

Thanks for submitting this PR!

A few minor tweaks, and then I think we should be good to go on this one.

[ytmimi]

Thanks again for taking on the PR, and for the quick turnaround after receiving some feedback! CI checks look like they're off to a good start, but I'll check back up on this later for another review.

[ytmimi]

The code changes look good to me!

I'm wondering if we could add another test case around an attribute that isn't necessarily a doc comment. For example, what does this get formatted to?

struct MyTuple(
    #[cfg(unix)] // some comment
    u64,
    #[cfg(not(unix))] /*block comment */
    u32,
);

struct MyTuple(
    #[cfg(unix)]
    // some comment
    u64,
    #[cfg(not(unix))]
    /*block comment */
    u32,
);

[ytmimi]

@tharun208 Thanks again for all the work on this. I know there's a been a decent amount of back and forth so far.

For completeness, and to improve the test coverage could you take all of the tuple struct tests and also include regular struct versions of them. For the regular struct versions of the tests could you also add some fields with various visibility modifiers like pub or pub(crate) in combination with block and inline comments and doc attributes and normal attributes?

[tharun208]

@ytmimi sorry for replying late. will improve the coverage and possibly come with the changes next week.

[ytmimi]

@tharun208 absolutely no worries. I totally get that things come up and working on PRs can get away from you. No rush on the requested tests, but if you have time to work on them next that would be great!

[tharun208]

@ytmimi can we merge this and introduce the test changes as a new pr?

[ytmimi]

@ytmimi can we merge this and introduce the test changes as a new pr?

I personally don't have an issue with that, and I think the current tests show that the fix works, but just to give you an example these were the additional test cases that I was looking for:

struct MyTuple(
    #[cfg(unix)] // some comment
    pub u64,
    #[cfg(not(unix))] /*block comment */
    pub(crate) u32,
);

struct MyTuple(
    /// Doc Comments
    /* TODO note to add more to Doc Comments */
    pub u32,
    /// Doc Comments
    // TODO note
    pub(crate) u64,
);

struct MyStruct {
    #[cfg(unix)] // some comment
    a: u64,
    #[cfg(not(unix))] /*block comment */
    b: u32,
}

struct MyStruct {
    #[cfg(unix)] // some comment
    pub a: u64,
    #[cfg(not(unix))] /*block comment */
    pub(crate) b: u32,
}

struct MyStruct {
    /// Doc Comments
    /* TODO note to add more to Doc Comments */
    a: u32,
    /// Doc Comments
    // TODO note
    b: u64,
}

struct MyStruct {
    /// Doc Comments
    /* TODO note to add more to Doc Comments */
    pub a: u32,
    /// Doc Comments
    // TODO note
    pub(crate) b: u64,
}

[ytmimi]

Thank you for adding those additional test cases!! Just one minor tweak to reintroduce a newline at the of test/souce/structs.rs, and I think we're good to go here.

[tharun208]

@ytmimi done 😃

[ytmimi]

LGTM Thanks for this!

[calebcartwright]

lgtm as well, thank you both!