Rollup of 5 pull requests #62080
Closed
Rollup of 5 pull requests #62080
Conversation
This file contains 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
It's more efficient than the fs::read_dir API
compiletest: Introduce `// {check,build,run}-pass` pass modes
Pass UI tests now have three modes
```
// check-pass
// build-pass
// run-pass
```
mirroring equivalent well-known `cargo` commands.
`// check-pass` will compile the test skipping codegen (which is expensive and isn't supposed to fail in most cases).
`// build-pass` will compile and link the test without running it.
`// run-pass` will compile, link and run the test.
Tests without a "pass" annotation are still considered "fail" tests.
Most UI tests would probably want to switch to `check-pass`.
Tests validating codegen would probably want to run the generated code as well and use `run-pass`.
`build-pass` should probably be rare (linking tests?).
rust-lang#61755 will provide a way to run the tests with any mode, e.g. bump `check-pass` tests to `run-pass` to satisfy especially suspicious people, and be able to make sure that codegen doesn't breaks in some entirely unexpected way.
Tests marked with any mode are expected to pass with any other mode, if that's not the case for some legitimate reason, then the test should be made a "fail" test rather than a "pass" test.
Perhaps some secondary CI can verify this invariant, but that's not super urgent.
`// compile-pass` still works and is equivalent to `build-pass`.
Why is `// compile-pass` bad - 1) it gives an impression that the test is only compiled, but not linked, 2) it doesn't mirror a cargo command.
It can be removed some time in the future in a separate PR.
cc rust-lang#61712
Speed up tidy master: Time (mean ± σ): 3.478 s ± 0.033 s [User: 3.298 s, System: 0.178 s] Range (min … max): 3.425 s … 3.525 s 10 runs This PR: Time (mean ± σ): 1.098 s ± 0.006 s [User: 783.7 ms, System: 310.2 ms] Range (min … max): 1.092 s … 1.113 s 10 runs Alleviates rust-lang#59884. For the most part each commit stands on its own. Timings are on warm filesystem cache. r? @eddyb
submodules: Update clippy from 5a11ed7 to c5d1ecd Changes: ```console % git shortlog --no-merges 5a11ed7.. Daniele D'Orazio (4): make needless_return work with void functions update tests and fix lints in clippy more idiomatic code cargo fmt Jeremy Stucki (1): Remove needless lifetimes Lzu Tao (1): Fix fallout cause NodeId pruning Matthias Krüger (1): readme: update flip1995 (1): Remove another unnecessary lifetime ``` r? @oli-obk
Run rustfmt on some libsyntax files As part of rust-lang#62008, run rustfmt on: - src/libsyntax/ext/tt/macro_rules.rs - src/libsyntax/ext/tt/quoted.rs There is no semantic change. To fix potential merge conflicts, simply choose the other side then run rustfmt and fix any tidy check (like line length).
…rochenkov Remove `ast::Guard` With the introduction of `ast::ExprKind::Let` in rust-lang#60861, the `ast::Guard` structure is now redundant in terms of representing [`if let` guards](rust-lang#51114) in AST since it can be represented by `ExprKind::Let` syntactically. Therefore, we remove `ast::Guard` here. However, we keep `hir::Guard` because the semantic representation is a different matter and this story is more unclear right now (might involve `goto 'arm` in HIR or something...). r? @petrochenkov
|
@bors r+ p=5 rollup=never |
|
📌 Commit a8b4d1d has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 23, 2019
Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - #61778 (compiletest: Introduce `// {check,build,run}-pass` pass modes) - #62037 (Speed up tidy) - #62052 (submodules: Update clippy from 5a11ed7 to c5d1ecd) - #62070 (Run rustfmt on some libsyntax files) - #62075 (Remove `ast::Guard`) Failed merges: r? @ghost
|
💔 Test failed - checks-travis |
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
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.
Successful merges:
// {check,build,run}-passpass modes #61778 (compiletest: Introduce// {check,build,run}-passpass modes)ast::Guard#62075 (Removeast::Guard)Failed merges:
r? @ghost