diff options
| author | Guillaume Gomez <guillaume1.gomez@gmail.com> | 2024-06-18 15:30:47 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | GitHub <noreply@github.com> | 2024-06-18 15:30:47 +0200 |
| commit | 9f455d3246c15e1dd0aa32d53a2aad51c9bfc143 (patch) | |
| tree | 8b24d28ab1b8114bb4afafcf00480b29494d5dc0 /compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/diagnostics.rs | |
| parent | bbec736f2d40855f2bc0f5e8dca1a05c19861bb1 (diff) | |
| parent | 50936586323eefb6504945f444fe9e4928f2bb86 (diff) | |
| download | rust-9f455d3246c15e1dd0aa32d53a2aad51c9bfc143.tar.gz rust-9f455d3246c15e1dd0aa32d53a2aad51c9bfc143.zip | |
Rollup merge of #126621 - Zalathar:test-coverage-attr, r=petrochenkov
More thorough status-quo tests for `#[coverage(..)]` In light of the stabilization push at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84605#issuecomment-2166514660, I have written some tests to more thoroughly capture the current behaviour of the `#[coverage(..)]` attribute. These tests aim to capture the *current* behaviour, which is not necessarily the desired behaviour. For example, some of the error message are not great, some things that perhaps ought to cause an error do not, and recursive coverage attributes have not been implemented yet. `@rustbot` label +A-code-coverage
Diffstat (limited to 'compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/diagnostics.rs')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions