Drop-in replacement to panics in proc-macros
Motivation
Error handling in proc-macros sucks. It's not much of a choice today:
you either "bubble up" the error up to top-level of you macro and convert it to
a compile_error!
invocation or just use a good old panic. Both these ways suck:
- Former sucks because it's quite redundant to unroll a proper error handling
just for critical errors that will crash the macro anyway so people mostly
choose not to bother with it at all and use panic. I have yet to see a crate > 700
lines of code that does it, simple
.expect
is too tempting. - Later sucks because panics aren't for error-reporting; panics are for bug-detecting
(like unwrapping on
None
or out-of range indexing) or for early development stages when you need a prototype ASAP and error handling can wait. But main disadvantage of this approach is even simpler: no way to highlight exact place that's an error's source.
Solution
That said, we need a solution, but this solution must meet these conditions:
- It must be better than panics. The main point: it must offer a way to carry span information over to user.
- It must require as little effort as possible to migrate from panic. Ideally, a new macro with the same semantics plus ability to carry out span info.
This crate aims to provide such a mechanism. All you have to do is enclose all
the code inside your top-level #[proc_macro]
function in filter_macro_errors!
invocation and change panics to span_error!
/call_site_error!
where appropriate:
// This is your main entry point
How it works
I must confess: I used panics as a try/catch mechanism. I've committed this sin so others may live in peace and prosperity, god save my soul.
Essentially, the filter_macro_errors!
macro is a
try catch
span_error!
and co are
throw ;
When you do span_error!
you trigger panic
that will be caught by filter_macro_errors!
and converted to compile_error!
invocation.
All the panics triggered not by span_error!
and co will be resumed as is.
Panic catching is indeed slow but the macro is about to abort anyway so speed is not
a concern here. Please note that this crate is not intended to be used in any other way
than a proc-macro error reporting, use Result
and ?
instead.
Testing
TODO: fork https://github.com/laumann/compiletest-rs and make it understand explicit line numbers.