Cursor aware record expansion

[vidit-od]

Another PR to fix issue #4782. Previously PR #4807 was raised but later discarded due to the following main reason.

• Getting Multiple suggestions increases cognitive load to identify what actually to click
• The name at the beginning do not help in improving user experience.

This is a Small PR aiming to introduce Cursor aware record expansion.

• users just need to trigger code action
• gets just one suggestion closest to cursor position.
• does not require to expand any other records to expand current record as experienced in original issue.

[ozkutuk]

In theory, I like the idea, but unless I am missing something...this doesn't seem to be fixing the original issue at all? I have tried on this example file:

module RecTest where

data RecOuter = RecOuter
  { inner :: RecInner
  }

data RecInner
    = RecInner
    { foo :: Char
    , bar :: Int
    }

ex :: RecOuter
ex = RecOuter (RecInner 'c' 42)

I have invoked the code action while the cursor was over RecInner, and the result was:

ex :: RecOuter
ex = RecOuter { inner = (RecInner 'c' 42) }

...which is already the current behavior and from what I understand exactly what the original issue complains about. I might as well be missing the point of the change though, so please let me know if that is the case. Either way, I think it also makes sense to add a test for the case we are trying to address, both to ensure that the problem is indeed fixed, and also to prevent regressions in the future.

[fendor]

Looks pretty good to me, one more test please and a couple of nitpicks!

[fendor]

LGTM, thank you!

[ozkutuk]

LGTM, just one minor suggestion on code style. Feel free to take it or leave it as you see fit.

[vidit-od]

Done, Hopefully everything is covered now.

Thanks a lot for reviewing and helping me on this PR @ozkutuk @fendor .

Also a thing to consider for PR #4819 . This PR introduces a few extra testcases that still follows "Record wildcard expansion" format. They will require change.

[ozkutuk]

@vidit-od Looking good! I'll leave it to @fendor to push the merge button.

Also a thing to consider for PR #4819 . This PR introduces a few extra testcases that still follows "Record wildcard expansion" format. They will require change.

Yes, I will rebase that PR on top of your work once it gets merged, but thanks for the heads-up.