about summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/src/libcoretest/option.rs
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorLines
2017-04-03Move libXtest into libX/testsStjepan Glavina-272/+0
This change moves: 1. `libcoretest` into `libcore/tests` 2. `libcollectionstest` into `libcollections/tests` This is a follow-up to #39561.
2016-03-11cleanup int suffixes in libcoretestsrinivasreddy-3/+3
2015-08-27core: Implement IntoIterator for Option and Result referencesGeorg Brandl-1/+8
Fixes #27996.
2015-06-17Fallout in tests and docs from feature renamingsAlex Crichton-2/+2
2015-06-10Removed many pointless calls to *iter() and iter_mut()Joshua Landau-1/+1
2015-04-28Unstub some testsTamir Duberstein-2/+1
2015-04-28Remove unused variableTamir Duberstein-9/+7
2015-04-28Register new snapshotsTamir Duberstein-2/+1
2015-03-27Test fixes and rebase conflicts, round 1Alex Crichton-3/+0
2015-03-26Mass rename uint/int to usize/isizeAlex Crichton-24/+24
Now that support has been removed, all lingering use cases are renamed.
2015-03-09Rename #[should_fail] to #[should_panic]Steven Fackler-3/+3
2015-03-03Add `: Box<_>` or `::Box<_>` type annotations to various places.Felix S. Klock II-1/+1
This is the kind of change that one is expected to need to make to accommodate overloaded-`box`. ---- Note that this is not *all* of the changes necessary to accommodate Issue 22181. It is merely the subset of those cases where there was already a let-binding in place that made it easy to add the necesasry type ascription. (For unnamed intermediate `Box` values, one must go down a different route; `Box::new` is the option that maximizes portability, but has potential inefficiency depending on whether the call is inlined.) ---- There is one place worth note, `run-pass/coerce-match.rs`, where I used an ugly form of `Box<_>` type ascription where I would have preferred to use `Box::new` to accommodate overloaded-`box`. I deliberately did not use `Box::new` here, because that is already done in coerce-match-calls.rs. ---- Precursor for overloaded-`box` and placement-`in`; see Issue 22181.
2015-01-31Kill more `isize`sTobias Bucher-1/+1
2015-01-30Remove all `i` suffixesTobias Bucher-13/+13
2015-01-29`range(a, b).foo()` -> `(a..b).foo()`Jorge Aparicio-3/+3
sed -i 's/ range(\([^,]*\), *\([^()]*\))\./ (\1\.\.\2)\./g' **/*.rs
2015-01-07markers -> markerNick Cameron-2/+2
2015-01-07Change `std::kinds` to `std::markers`; flatten `std::kinds::marker`Nick Cameron-2/+2
[breaking-change]
2015-01-05coretest: remove/ignore testsJorge Aparicio-1/+4
2014-12-06libcoretest: remove unnecessary `as_slice()` callsJorge Aparicio-4/+4
2014-11-18make cloned generic over deref... and have its tests actually runAlexis Beingessner-9/+24
2014-11-16implement cloned for OptionAlexis Beingessner-0/+13
2014-10-29Rename fail! to panic!Steve Klabnik-3/+3
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/221 The current terminology of "task failure" often causes problems when writing or speaking about code. You often want to talk about the possibility of an operation that returns a Result "failing", but cannot because of the ambiguity with task failure. Instead, you have to speak of "the failing case" or "when the operation does not succeed" or other circumlocutions. Likewise, we use a "Failure" header in rustdoc to describe when operations may fail the task, but it would often be helpful to separate out a section describing the "Err-producing" case. We have been steadily moving away from task failure and toward Result as an error-handling mechanism, so we should optimize our terminology accordingly: Result-producing functions should be easy to describe. To update your code, rename any call to `fail!` to `panic!` instead. Assuming you have not created your own macro named `panic!`, this will work on UNIX based systems: grep -lZR 'fail!' . | xargs -0 -l sed -i -e 's/fail!/panic!/g' You can of course also do this by hand. [breaking-change]
2014-10-19Remove a large amount of deprecated functionalityAlex Crichton-47/+6
Spring cleaning is here! In the Fall! This commit removes quite a large amount of deprecated functionality from the standard libraries. I tried to ensure that only old deprecated functionality was removed. This is removing lots and lots of deprecated features, so this is a breaking change. Please consult the deprecation messages of the deleted code to see how to migrate code forward if it still needs migration. [breaking-change]
2014-09-22Update calls of deprecated functions in macros.Victor Berger-0/+1
Fallout of #17185.
2014-09-16Fallout from renamingAaron Turon-2/+2
2014-09-09Remove some test warnings.Jonas Hietala-0/+3
2014-08-28Fallout from stabilizing core::optionAaron Turon-3/+3
2014-06-29Extract tests from libcore to a separate crateSteven Fackler-0/+278
Libcore's test infrastructure is complicated by the fact that many lang items are defined in the crate. The current approach (realcore/realstd imports) is hacky and hard to work with (tests inside of core::cmp haven't been run for months!). Moving tests to a separate crate does mean that they can only test the public API of libcore, but I don't feel that that is too much of an issue. The only tests that I had to get rid of were some checking the various numeric formatters, but those are also exercised through normal format! calls in other tests.