tests/ui: A New Order [27/N]
#143302
tests/ui: A New Order [27/N]
#143302
Conversation
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
| // `expr?` expands to: | ||
| // | ||
| // match expr { | ||
| // Ok(val) => val, | ||
| // Err(err) => return Err(From::from(err)), | ||
| // } | ||
| // | ||
| // This test verifies that the expansion is hygienic, i.e., it's not affected by other `val` and | ||
| // `err` bindings that may be in scope. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
AFAIK, it's not true anymore, it expands into this https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/ops/trait.Try.html#tymethod.branch
There was a problem hiding this comment.
like this
match maybe_err.branch() {
ControlFlow::Continue(r) => r,
ControlFlow::Break(e) => return Result::from_residual(e),
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also if it'll help to you invistigation what is going here, here is a discussion about it #84277 (comment)
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-author
| @@ -1,17 +1,17 @@ | |||
| //@ build-fail | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just drop it like this with no any addition?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah - the default is check-fail, and I'm thinking that is fine here since we're testing frontend diagnostics. We prefer that because it's cheap+fast (no codegen required). build-fail is used for things that are expected to fail later, like linking problems.
Some more info at https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/tests/ui.html#controlling-passfail-expectations
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Test is not passing if i remove build-fail, so... I guess we should keep it
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Note
Intermediate commits are intended to help review, but will be squashed prior to merge.
Some
tests/ui/housekeeping, to trim down number of tests directly undertests/ui/. Part of #133895.r? @tgross35