{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreifhyukzftwdb4bqqr3v4gd2hlhe2bq7m3w4x6flnnq6cx7swlg2je",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:ivbknywyskln22er3nkssdhl/app.bsky.feed.post/3mn4wlkk6xqs2"
  },
  "path": "/t/parser-error-recovery-in-syn-for-better-ide-support-with-proc-macros/24362#post_8",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-31T05:09:07.000Z",
  "site": "https://internals.rust-lang.org",
  "textContent": "kpreid:\n\n> For attribute macros and derive macros, if the macro is getting called at all, you know that `rustc` thinks that the item _is_ valid syntax and will not be producing an error. if you then get a `syn` parse error, then you _must_ be in a case where `syn` doesn’t support the syntax `rustc` does, and in that case you had better tell the user that that’s the problem, because `rustc` won’t.\n\nI'm not sure about rustc, but for rust-analyzer this is definitely not true.\n\nAlso, syntax not supported by `syn` is rare enough, and duplicate error, often unclear and in different place, is annoying enough, that I consider this acceptable.",
  "title": "Parser error recovery in `syn` for better IDE support with proc-macros"
}