Rewrite version test run-make as an UI test
#123563
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rustbot
added
A-testsuite
|
Some changes occurred in run-make tests. cc @jieyouxu |
|
r? @jieyouxu |
|
Looks good to me. r=me after CI is green. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Urgau
requested changes
Apr 6, 2024
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
jieyouxu
reviewed
Apr 6, 2024
fix: re-add stout ignore restore does-nothing fix: universal check-pass
|
Thanks for the PR! |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 7, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#119224 (Drop panic hook after running tests) - rust-lang#123411 (Put checks that detect UB under their own flag below debug_assertions) - rust-lang#123516 (Do not ICE on field access check on expr with `ty::Error`) - rust-lang#123522 (Stabilize const Atomic*::into_inner) - rust-lang#123559 (Add a debug asserts call to match_projection_projections to ensure invariant) - rust-lang#123563 (Rewrite `version` test run-make as an UI test) Failed merges: - rust-lang#123569 (Move some tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 7, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#123563 - Oneirical:version, r=jieyouxu Rewrite `version` test run-make as an UI test Claiming the simple `version` test from rust-lang#121876. Reasoning: As discussed in rust-lang#123297, 10 years ago, some changes to CLI flags warranted the creation of the `version` test. Since it's not actually executing the compiled binary, it has no purpose being a `run-make` test and should instead be an UI test. This is the exact same change as it was shown on my closed PR rust-lang#123297. Changes were ready, but I did a major Git mishap while trying to fix a tidy error and messed up my branch. The details of this error are explained [here](rust-lang#123297 (comment)).
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 10, 2024
Clean up tests/ui by removing `does-nothing.rs` In [a previous PR](rust-lang#123297 (comment)), it was suggested that this test be removed: > it's testing a basic diagnostic for an unknown variable (added over a decade ago for rust-lang#154) that is already covered by probably dozens or hundreds of other tests. It was then suggested that [opening a new PR](rust-lang#123563 (comment)) for this would be more organized. I'm setting this as a draft, as: 1. The tests/ui directory is rather disorganized, a large quantity of tests are not even contained inside their own directories. This PR could turn into "clean up the UI tests directory", if I were to place everything into categories (for example, everything related to CLI flags could get placed in a cli directory). 2. This will have a merge conflict with rust-lang#123563 should that get merged. I trust that _this time_, I won't run into [The Incident](rust-lang#123297 (comment)) while rebasing. Edit: Yay, I did it properly!
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 10, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#123568 - Oneirical:delete-tests, r=wesleywiser Clean up tests/ui by removing `does-nothing.rs` In [a previous PR](rust-lang#123297 (comment)), it was suggested that this test be removed: > it's testing a basic diagnostic for an unknown variable (added over a decade ago for rust-lang#154) that is already covered by probably dozens or hundreds of other tests. It was then suggested that [opening a new PR](rust-lang#123563 (comment)) for this would be more organized. I'm setting this as a draft, as: 1. The tests/ui directory is rather disorganized, a large quantity of tests are not even contained inside their own directories. This PR could turn into "clean up the UI tests directory", if I were to place everything into categories (for example, everything related to CLI flags could get placed in a cli directory). 2. This will have a merge conflict with rust-lang#123563 should that get merged. I trust that _this time_, I won't run into [The Incident](rust-lang#123297 (comment)) while rebasing. Edit: Yay, I did it properly!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Claiming the simple
versiontest from #121876.Reasoning: As discussed in #123297, 10 years ago, some changes to CLI flags warranted the creation of the
versiontest. Since it's not actually executing the compiled binary, it has no purpose being arun-maketest and should instead be an UI test.This is the exact same change as it was shown on my closed PR #123297. Changes were ready, but I did a major Git mishap while trying to fix a tidy error and messed up my branch. The details of this error are explained here.