about summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/src/test/compile-fail/issue-3601.rs
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorLines
2018-07-15Move some `compile-fail` tests to `ui`Esteban Küber-44/+0
2017-01-03Make is_useful handle empty types properlyAndrew Cann-1/+0
2015-02-11Opt into `box_patterns` feature gate in all tests that use them.Felix S. Klock II-0/+1
2015-01-08compile-fail tests: Add feature attributes to enable box pat/expr syntax in ↵Felix S. Klock II-0/+1
various tests.
2014-11-17Switch to purely namespaced enumsSteven Fackler-4/+4
This breaks code that referred to variant names in the same namespace as their enum. Reexport the variants in the old location or alter code to refer to the new locations: ``` pub enum Foo { A, B } fn main() { let a = A; } ``` => ``` pub use self::Foo::{A, B}; pub enum Foo { A, B } fn main() { let a = A; } ``` or ``` pub enum Foo { A, B } fn main() { let a = Foo::A; } ``` [breaking-change]
2014-10-29Rename fail! to panic!Steve Klabnik-1/+1
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]
2014-05-24core: rename strbuf::StrBuf to string::StringRicho Healey-1/+1
[breaking-change]
2014-05-14test: Remove all uses of `~str` from the test suite.Patrick Walton-1/+1
2014-05-06librustc: Remove `~EXPR`, `~TYPE`, and `~PAT` from the language, exceptPatrick Walton-6/+7
for `~str`/`~[]`. Note that `~self` still remains, since I forgot to add support for `Box<self>` before the snapshot. How to update your code: * Instead of `~EXPR`, you should write `box EXPR`. * Instead of `~TYPE`, you should write `Box<Type>`. * Instead of `~PATTERN`, you should write `box PATTERN`. [breaking-change]
2013-10-22Drop the '2' suffix from logging macrosAlex Crichton-1/+1
Who doesn't like a massive renaming?
2013-09-30cfail: Remove usage of fmt!Alex Crichton-1/+1
2013-05-14Use static string with fail!() and remove fail!(fmt!())Björn Steinbrink-1/+1
fail!() used to require owned strings but can handle static strings now. Also, it can pass its arguments to fmt!() on its own, no need for the caller to call fmt!() itself.
2013-02-27testsuite: Update and un-xfail #3601 testTim Chevalier-8/+8
2013-02-22test: De-mut the test suite. rs=demutingPatrick Walton-2/+2
2013-02-13Remove die!, raplace invocations with fail! Issue #4524 pt 3Nick Desaulniers-1/+1
2013-01-31Replace most invocations of fail keyword with die! macroNick Desaulniers-1/+1
2013-01-03Actually xfail this, unbreak buildTim Chevalier-0/+11
2013-01-03Add test cases (one xfailed, one not)Tim Chevalier-0/+31
as per #3601 and #3609