Better TEST_OUTPUT
#14515
Replies: 2 comments 8 replies
-
I think it should be marked with some kind of unmistakable marker (e.g. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
2 replies
-
Why don't we use One example:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
6 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
When you have a big fail_compilation test, for example:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/blob/master/compiler/test/fail_compilation/retscope6.d
There are two annoyances:
TEST_OUTPUT
blocks, they cannot be automatically updated withAUTO_UPDATE=1
#line
directives for stable lines, you cannot quickly locate an error's corresponding line in your text editor.(See also #14434 (comment) and #14434 (comment) where this came up)
Splitting it up into smaller tests isn't all so great either:
But what if instead of
TEST_OUTPUT
blocks, the test runner could also parse// Error:
or// Deprecation:
comments:The whole
fail_compilation/retscope6.d(6007):
prefix will be inferred from the location of the comment in the source file. I think this is both easy to write, read, and mechanically auto update. What do you think?Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions