There was a bug with LetStmts where we name resolved the identifier

pattern first before the init expression. This lead to a situation
where shadowing rules were broken.

Example:

let x = 1;
let x = x + 1;

In this example the code was referencing the 2nd LetStmt as the resolved
name for the Identifier reference.

2 files changed, 7 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/gcc/rust/resolve/rust-ast-resolve-stmt.h b/gcc/rust/resolve/rust-ast-resolve-stmt.h
index 87b3cf3..6d751e6 100644
--- a/gcc/rust/resolve/rust-ast-resolve-stmt.h
+++ b/gcc/rust/resolve/rust-ast-resolve-stmt.h
@@ -51,12 +51,12 @@ public:
 
   void visit (AST::LetStmt &stmt)
   {
+    if (stmt.has_init_expr ())
+      ResolveExpr::go (stmt.get_init_expr ().get (), stmt.get_node_id ());
+
     PatternDeclaration::go (stmt.get_pattern ().get (), stmt.get_node_id ());
     if (stmt.has_type ())
       ResolveType::go (stmt.get_type ().get (), stmt.get_node_id ());
-
-    if (stmt.has_init_expr ())
-      ResolveExpr::go (stmt.get_init_expr ().get (), stmt.get_node_id ());
   }
 
 private:
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/rust.test/compilable/shadow2.rs b/gcc/testsuite/rust.test/compilable/shadow2.rs
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fbac8c0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/rust.test/compilable/shadow2.rs
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+fn main() {
+    let x = 1;
+    let x = x + 1;
+}