src/test/incremental/ich_nested_items.rs


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

// Check that the hash of `foo` doesn't change just because we ordered
// the nested items (or even added new ones).

// revisions: cfail1 cfail2
// build-pass (FIXME(62277): could be check-pass?)

#![crate_type = "rlib"]
#![feature(rustc_attrs)]

#[rustc_clean(label = "hir_owner", cfg = "cfail2")]
#[rustc_dirty(label = "hir_owner_nodes", cfg = "cfail2")]
pub fn foo() {
    #[cfg(cfail1)]
    pub fn baz() {} // order is different...

    // FIXME: Make "hir_owner" use `rustc_clean` here. Currently "hir_owner" includes a reference to
    // the parent node, which is the statement holding this item. Changing the position of
    // `bar` in `foo` will update that reference and make `hir_owner(bar)` dirty.
    #[rustc_dirty(label = "hir_owner", cfg = "cfail2")]
    #[rustc_clean(label = "hir_owner_nodes", cfg = "cfail2")]
    pub fn bar() {} // but that doesn't matter.

    #[cfg(cfail2)]
    pub fn baz() {} // order is different...

    pub fn bap() {} // neither does adding a new item
}