diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'src')
| -rw-r--r-- | src/rustc/middle/typeck/check.rs | 22 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | src/test/compile-fail/issue-3044.rs | 9 |
2 files changed, 21 insertions, 10 deletions
diff --git a/src/rustc/middle/typeck/check.rs b/src/rustc/middle/typeck/check.rs index 61a6c8dff51..c6856d10dc5 100644 --- a/src/rustc/middle/typeck/check.rs +++ b/src/rustc/middle/typeck/check.rs @@ -1316,7 +1316,7 @@ fn check_expr_with_unifier(fcx: @fn_ctxt, _ { none } } } - ast::not | ast::neg { some(expected.get()) } + ast::not | ast::neg { expected } ast::deref { none } } }; @@ -1475,10 +1475,11 @@ fn check_expr_with_unifier(fcx: @fn_ctxt, capture::check_capture_clause(tcx, expr.id, cap_clause); } ast::expr_fn_block(decl, body, cap_clause) { + let proto = unpack_expected(fcx, expected, |sty| + alt sty { ty::ty_fn({proto, _}) { some(proto) } _ { none } } + ).get_default(ast::proto_box); // Take the prototype from the expected type, but default to block: - let proto = unpack_expected(fcx, expected, |sty| - alt sty { ty::ty_fn({proto, _}) { some(proto) } _ { none } } - ).get_default(ast::proto_box); + let proto = proto_1.get_default(ast::proto_box); check_expr_fn(fcx, expr, proto, decl, body, false, expected); capture::check_capture_clause(tcx, expr.id, cap_clause); } @@ -1489,9 +1490,9 @@ fn check_expr_with_unifier(fcx: @fn_ctxt, // parameter. The catch here is that we need to validate two things: // 1. a closure that returns a bool is expected // 2. the cloure that was given returns unit - let expected_sty = unpack_expected(fcx, expected, |x| some(x)).get(); + let expected_sty = unpack_expected(fcx, expected, |x| some(x)); let (inner_ty, proto) = alt expected_sty { - ty::ty_fn(fty) { + some(ty::ty_fn(fty)) { alt infer::mk_subty(fcx.infcx, fty.output, ty::mk_bool(tcx)) { result::ok(_) {} result::err(err) { @@ -1526,14 +1527,15 @@ fn check_expr_with_unifier(fcx: @fn_ctxt, } } ast::expr_do_body(b) { - let expected_sty = unpack_expected(fcx, expected, |x| some(x)).get(); + let expected_sty = unpack_expected(fcx, expected, |x| some(x)); let (inner_ty, proto) = alt expected_sty { - ty::ty_fn(fty) { + some(ty::ty_fn(fty)) { (ty::mk_fn(tcx, fty), fty.proto) } _ { - tcx.sess.span_fatal(expr.span, ~"a `do` function's last argument \ - should be of function type"); + tcx.sess.span_fatal(expr.span, ~"Non-function passed to a `do` \ + function as its last argument, or wrong number of arguments \ + passed to a `do` function"); } }; alt check b.node { diff --git a/src/test/compile-fail/issue-3044.rs b/src/test/compile-fail/issue-3044.rs new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..5898e7242c7 --- /dev/null +++ b/src/test/compile-fail/issue-3044.rs @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ +// error-pattern: Non-function passed to a `do` function as its last argument, or wrong number of arguments passed to a `do` function +fn main() { + let needlesArr: ~[char] = ~['a', 'f']; + do vec::foldr(needlesArr) |x, y| { + } +// for some reason if I use the new error syntax for the two error messages this generates, +// the test runner gets confused -- tjc +} + |