references.excludeTests to exclude #[cfg(test)]-gated refs

[krobelus]

The references.excludeTests setting fails to exclude references from test code in various scenarios.
For example when using textDocument/references on "foo" in

pub fn foo() {}
#[cfg(test)]
mod tests {
	use crate::foo; // Should be excluded
}

same when the test module lives in a different file:

#[cfg(test)]
mod tests;

Try to fix that for most real-world cases.

TODO: the unit test does not actually test this because whereas
full rust-analyzer finds references in code that's disabled due to
#[cfg(test)] directives, the test logic doesn't; "ModuleData::children"
is always empty. Would appreciate help with that.

changelog fix

Closes #18573

[danielrainer]

Maybe something similar to CfgExpr::fold can be used for more complex cases, e.g.:

diff --git a/crates/ide-db/src/search.rs b/crates/ide-db/src/search.rs
index 41a2ea8fe0..ad3af99fb9 100644
--- a/crates/ide-db/src/search.rs
+++ b/crates/ide-db/src/search.rs
@@ -1421,17 +1421,26 @@
 
 /// Returns true if the given attributes enable code only in test configurations.
 pub fn has_cfg_test(attrs: &AttrsWithOwner) -> bool {
-    fn is_cfg_test(cfg_expr: &CfgExpr) -> bool {
+    fn is_cfg_test(cfg_expr: &CfgExpr) -> Option<bool> {
         use CfgExpr::*;
         use cfg::CfgAtom;
         match cfg_expr {
-            Atom(CfgAtom::Flag(flag)) => *flag == sym::test,
-            All(exprs) => exprs.iter().any(is_cfg_test),
-            // N.B. possible false negatives here.
-            Invalid | Atom(CfgAtom::KeyValue { .. }) | Any(_) | Not(_) => false,
+            Invalid => None,
+            Atom(CfgAtom::Flag(flag)) => Some(*flag == sym::test),
+            Atom(CfgAtom::KeyValue { .. }) => Some(false),
+            All(exprs) => {
+                exprs.iter().try_fold(false, |acc, expr| is_cfg_test(expr).map(|res| acc || res))
+            }
+            Any(exprs) => {
+                exprs.iter().try_fold(true, |acc, expr| is_cfg_test(expr).map(|res| acc && res))
+            }
+            Not(expr) => is_cfg_test(expr).map(|is_test| !is_test),
         }
     }
-    attrs.cfgs().any(|cfg_expr| is_cfg_test(&cfg_expr))
+    attrs
+        .cfgs()
+        .try_fold(false, |acc, cfg_expr| is_cfg_test(&cfg_expr).map(|is_test| acc || is_test))
+        .unwrap_or(false)
 }
 
 /// Returns true if this reference's enclosing module is declared conditional on `cfg(test)`.

I noticed that expressions annotated with #[cfg(test)] are not handled by this PR, and it seems that the approach used for other ast types does not work for ast::Expr. Does the ast::HasAttrs trait correspond to the types which can be annotated with #[cfg(test)]? If so, maybe the implementation can be based around that. It might be unnecessary to handle some of these types, since I don't know why anyone would put #[cfg(test)] on something like an expression.

[rustbot]

☔ The latest upstream changes (possibly #21804) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[ChayimFriedman2]

@krobelus Are you still interested in this?