9855: feature: Destructure Tuple Assist r=Veykril a=Booksbaum

Part of #8673. This PR only handles tuples, not TupleStruct and RecordStruct.

Code Assist to destructure a tuple into its items:
![Destructure_Tuple_Assist](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/15612932/129020107-775d7c94-dca7-4d1f-a0a2-cd63cabf4132.gif)



* Should work in nearly all pattern positions, like let assignment, function parameters, match arms, for loops, and nested variables (`if let Some($0t) = Some((1,2))`)  
  -> everywhere `IdentPat` is allowed
  * Exception: If there's a sub-pattern (``@`):`
    ```rust
    if let t @ (1..=3, 1..=3) = ... {}
    //     ^
    ```
    -> `t` must be a `Name`; `TuplePat` (`(_0, _1)`) isn't allowed
    * inside subpattern is ok:
      ```rust
      let t @ (a, _) = ((1,2), 3);
      //       ^
      ```
      ->
      ```rust
      let t @ ((_0, _1), _) = ((1,2), 3);
      ```
* Assist triggers only at tuple declaration, not tuple usage.  
  (might be useful especially when it creates a sub-pattern (after ``@`)` and only changes the usage under cursor -- but not part of this PR).

### References
References can be destructured:
```rust
let t = &(1,2);
//  ^
let v = t.0;
```
->
```rust
let (_0, _1) = &(1,2);
let v = _0;
```
BUT: `t.0` and `_0` have different types (`i32` vs. `&i32`) -> `v` has now a different type.

I think that's acceptable: I think the destructure assist is mostly used in simple, immediate scopes and not huge existing code.

Additional Notes:
* `ref` has same behaviour (-> `ref` is kept for items)
  ```rust
  let ref t = (1,2);
  //      ^
  ```
  ->
  ```rust
  let (ref _0, ref _1) = (1,2);
  ```
* Rust IntelliJ Plugin: doesn't trigger with `&` or `ref` at all 

### mutable
```rust
let mut t = (1,2);
//      ^
```
->
```rust
let (mut _0, mut _1) = (1,2);
```
and
```rust
let t = &mut (1,2);
//  ^
```
->
```rust
let (_0, _1) = &mut (1,2);
```
Again: with reference (`&mut`), `t.0` and `_0` have different types (`i32` vs `&mut i32`).  
And there's an additional issue with `&mut` and assignment:
```rust
let t = &mut (1,2);
//  ^
t.0 = 9;
```
->
```rust
let (_0, _1) = &mut (1,2);
_0 = 9;
//   ^
//   mismatched types
//   expected `&mut {integer}`, found integer
//   consider dereferencing here to assign to the mutable borrowed piece of memory
```
But I think that's quite a niche use case, so I don't catch that (`*_0 = 9;`)

Additional Notes:
* Rust IntelliJ Plugin: removes the `mut` (`let mut t = ...` -> `let (_0, _1) = ...`), doesn't trigger with `&mut`

### Binding after ``@``
Destructure tuple in sub-pattern is implemented:
```rust
let t = (1,2);
//  ^
let v = t.0;
let f = t.into();
```
->
```rust
let t @ (_0, _1) = (1,2);
let v = _0;
let f = t.into();
```
BUT: Bindings after ``@`` aren't currently in stable and require `#![feature(bindings_after_at)]` (though should be generally [available quite soon](rust-lang/rust#85305 (comment)) (with `1.56.0`)).  
But I don't know how to check for an enabled feature -> Destructure tuple in sub-pattern [isn't enabled](https://github.com/Booksbaum/rust-analyzer/blob/a4ee6c7954f910da3ca74fc0e25edda9077ad184/crates/ide_assists/src/handlers/destructure_tuple_binding.rs#L32) yet.

* When Destructure in sub-pattern is enabled there are two assists:
  * `Destructure tuple in place`:
    ```rust
    let t = (1,2);
    //  ^
    ```
    ->
    ```rust
    let (_0, _1) = (1,2);
    let v = _0;
    let f = /*t*/.into();
    ```
  * `Destructure tuple in sub-pattern`:
    ```rust
    let t = (1,2);
    //  ^
    let v = t.0;
    let f = t.into();
    ```
    ->
    ```rust
    let t @ (_0, _1) = (1,2);
    let v = _0;
    let f = t.into();
    ```
* When Destructure in sub-pattern is disabled, only the first one is available and just named `Destructure tuple`

<br/>
<br/>

### Caveats
* Unlike in #8673 or IntelliJ rust plugin, I'm not leaving the previous tuple name at function calls.  
  **Reasoning**: It's not too unlikely the tuple variable shadows another variable. Destructuring the tuple while leaving the function call untouched, results in still a valid function call -- but now with another variable:
  ```rust
  let t = (8,9);
  let t = (1,2);
  //  ^
  t.into()
  ```
  => Destructure Tuple
  ```rust
  let t = (8,9);
  let (_0, _1) = (1,2);
  t.into()
  ```
  `t.into()` is still valid -- using the first tuple.  
  Instead I comment out the tuple usage, which results in invalid code -> must be handled by user:
  ```rust
  /*t*/.into()
  ```
  * (though that might be a biased decision: For testing I just declared a lot of `t`s and quite ofen in lines next to each other...)
  * Issue: there are some cases that results in still valid code:
    * macro that accept the tuple as well as no arguments:
      ```rust
      macro_rules! m {
          () => { "foo" };
          ($e:expr) => { $e; "foo" };
      }
      let t = (1,2);
      m!(t);
      m!(/*t*/);
      ```
      -> both calls are valid ([test](https://github.com/Booksbaum/rust-analyzer/blob/a4ee6c7954f910da3ca74fc0e25edda9077ad184/crates/ide_assists/src/handlers/destructure_tuple_binding.rs#L1474))  
    * Probably with tuple as return value. Changing the return value most likely results in an error -- but in another place; not where the tuple usage was. 

  -> not sure that's the best way....  
  Additional the tuple name surrounded by comment is more difficult to edit than just the name.
* Code Assists don't support snippet placeholder, and rust analyzer just the first `$0` -> unfortunately no editing of generated tuple item variables. Cursor (`$0`) is placed on first generated item.

<br/>
<br/>

### Issues
* Tuple index usage in macro calls aren't converted:
  ```rust
  let t = (1,2);
  //  ^
  let v = t.0;
  println!("{}", t.0);
  ```
  ->
  ```rust
  let (_0, _1) = (1,2);
  let v = _0;
  println!("{}", /*t*/.0);
  ```
  ([tests](https://github.com/Booksbaum/rust-analyzer/blob/a4ee6c7954f910da3ca74fc0e25edda9077ad184/crates/ide_assists/src/handlers/destructure_tuple_binding.rs#L1294))
  * Issue is:  
    [name.syntax()](https://github.com/Booksbaum/rust-analyzer/blob/a4ee6c7954f910da3ca74fc0e25edda9077ad184/crates/ide_assists/src/handlers/destructure_tuple_binding.rs#L242-L244) in each [usage](https://github.com/Booksbaum/rust-analyzer/blob/a4ee6c7954f910da3ca74fc0e25edda9077ad184/crates/ide_assists/src/handlers/destructure_tuple_binding.rs#L108-L113) of a tuple is syntax & text_range in its file.  
    EXCEPT when tuple usage is in a macro call (`m!(t.0)`), the macro is expanded and syntax (and range) is based on that expanded macro, not in actual file.  
    That leads to several things:
    * I cannot differentiate between calling the macro with the tuple or with tuple item:
      ```rust
      macro_rules! m {
          ($t:expr, $i:expr) => { $t.0   $i };
      }
      let t = (1,2);
      m!(t, t.0);
      ```
      -> both `t` usages are resolved as tuple index usage
    * Range of resolved tuple index usage is in expanded macro, not in actual file  
     -> don't know where to replace index usage

    -> tuple items passed into a macro are ignored, and only the tuple name itself is handled (uncommented)
* I'm not checking if the generated names conflict with already existing variables.
  ```rust
  let _0 = 42;            // >-|
  let t = (1,2);          //   |
  let v = _0;             // <-|
  //  ^ 42
  ```
  => deconstruct tuple
  ```rust
  let _0 = 42;
  let (_0, _1) = (1,2);     // >-|
  let v = _0;               // <-|
  //  ^ now 1
  ```
  * I tried to get the scope at tuple declaration and its usages. And then iterate all names with [`process_all_names`](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/blob/145b51f9daf5371f1754c09eb2e3a77e0a24a0dc/crates/hir/src/semantics.rs#L935). But that doesn't find all local names for declarations (`let t = (1,2)`) (for usages it does)
  * This isn't unique to this Code Assist, but happen in others too (like `extract into variable` or `extract into function`). But here a name conflict is more likely (when destructuring multiple tuples, for examples nested ones (`let t = ((1,2),3)` -> `let (_0, _1) = ...` -> `let ((_0, _1), _1) = ...` -> error))
  * IntelliJ rust plugin does handle this (-> name is `_00`)

Co-authored-by: BooksBaum <15612932 [email protected]>

feature: Add `destructure_struct_binding`

Adds an assist for destructuring a struct in a binding (#8673). I saw that #13997 has been abandoned for a while, so I thought I'd give it a go.

## Example

```rust
let foo = Foo { bar: 1, baz: 2 };
let bar2 = foo.bar;
let baz2 = foo.baz;
let foo2 = foo;

let fizz = Fizz(1, 2);
let buzz = fizz.0;
```
becomes
```rust
let Foo { bar, baz } = Foo { bar: 1, baz: 2 };
let bar2 = bar;
let baz2 = baz;
let foo2 = todo!();

let Fizz(_0, _1) = Fizz(1, 2);
let buzz = _0;
```

More examples in the tests.

## What is included?

- [x] Destructure record, tuple, and unit struct bindings
- [x] Edit field usages
- [x] Non-exhaustive structs in foreign crates and private fields get hidden behind `..`
- [x] Nested bindings
- [x] Carry over `mut` and `ref mut` in nested bindings to fields, i.e. `let Foo { ref mut bar } = ...` becomes `let Foo { bar: Bar { baz: ref mut baz } } = ...`
- [x] Attempt to resolve collisions with other names in the scope
- [x] If the binding is to a reference, field usages are dereferenced if required
- [x] Use shorthand notation if possible

## Known limitations

- `let foo = Foo { bar: 1 }; foo;` currently results in `let Foo { bar } = Foo { bar: 1 }; todo!();` instead of reassembling the struct. This requires user intervention.
- Unused fields are not currently omitted. I thought that this is more ergonomic, as there already is a quick fix action for adding `: _` to unused field patterns.

feature: Add `destructure_struct_binding`

Adds an assist for destructuring a struct in a binding (#8673). I saw that #13997 has been abandoned for a while, so I thought I'd give it a go.

## Example

```rust
let foo = Foo { bar: 1, baz: 2 };
let bar2 = foo.bar;
let baz2 = foo.baz;
let foo2 = foo;

let fizz = Fizz(1, 2);
let buzz = fizz.0;
```
becomes
```rust
let Foo { bar, baz } = Foo { bar: 1, baz: 2 };
let bar2 = bar;
let baz2 = baz;
let foo2 = todo!();

let Fizz(_0, _1) = Fizz(1, 2);
let buzz = _0;
```

More examples in the tests.

## What is included?

- [x] Destructure record, tuple, and unit struct bindings
- [x] Edit field usages
- [x] Non-exhaustive structs in foreign crates and private fields get hidden behind `..`
- [x] Nested bindings
- [x] Carry over `mut` and `ref mut` in nested bindings to fields, i.e. `let Foo { ref mut bar } = ...` becomes `let Foo { bar: Bar { baz: ref mut baz } } = ...`
- [x] Attempt to resolve collisions with other names in the scope
- [x] If the binding is to a reference, field usages are dereferenced if required
- [x] Use shorthand notation if possible

## Known limitations

- `let foo = Foo { bar: 1 }; foo;` currently results in `let Foo { bar } = Foo { bar: 1 }; todo!();` instead of reassembling the struct. This requires user intervention.
- Unused fields are not currently omitted. I thought that this is more ergonomic, as there already is a quick fix action for adding `: _` to unused field patterns.