Skip to content

update for new TestDesc::allow_fail field #68

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 30, 2017
Merged

update for new TestDesc::allow_fail field #68

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions src/lib.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -274,6 +274,7 @@ pub fn make_test(config: &Config, testpaths: &TestPaths) -> test::TestDescAndFn
name: make_test_name(config, testpaths),
ignore: early_props.ignore,
should_panic: should_panic,
allow_fail: false,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should likely be a field of the Config structure so that it's configurable.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This code is copied from the upstream make_test() function: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/919c4a6707da3aa2cc9ff63e33057e1e2a90720b/src/tools/compiletest/src/main.rs#L479.

I think what we really want to do is to parse the attributes of the test to determine the intended value of allow_fail, but that would be less trivial of a change. Right now I only care about getting compiletest to run again.

I don't see how it would make sense to use a field of Config, as that struct is shared among all tests.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I tend to agree that fixing this should take priority over implementing new features, because without this fix this crate is not usable right now.

Maybe a separate ticket can be opened to make this configurable?

},
testfn: make_test_closure(config, testpaths),
}
Expand Down