Skip to content
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.

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

Adjusting tests to new parser #6143

Merged
merged 26 commits into from
Apr 2, 2023
Merged

Conversation

JaroslavTulach
Copy link
Member

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach commented Mar 30, 2023

Pull Request Description

Modification to various tests disabled when #5917 was integrated to pass with new parser. Fixes #5894.

Important Notes

Some tests can be fixed just by changes on the IR side. Some (especially error simulating ones) would benefit from changes in the Tree structure or at least @kazcw evaluation.

Checklist

Please ensure that the following checklist has been satisfied before submitting the PR:

  • All code follows the
    Scala,
    Java,
    and
    Rust
    style guides. In case you are using a language not listed above, follow the Rust style guide.
  • All code has been tested:
    • Unit tests have been written where possible.

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach added the CI: No changelog needed Do not require a changelog entry for this PR. label Mar 30, 2023
@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach requested a review from kazcw March 30, 2023 09:57
@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach self-assigned this Mar 30, 2023
Copy link
Collaborator

@hubertp hubertp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What is the point of conditionals that don't report failures? I thought the whole point was to catch those early

@@ -89,14 +89,13 @@ class IgnoredBindingsTest extends CompilerTest {
}
}

"Ignored bindings desugaring for bindings" ignore {
// FIXME: Not supported by new parser--needs triage (#5894).
"Ignored bindings desugaring for bindings" should {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The tree for _ = x looks reasonable, this syntax would need support in translation to be handled as before.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is it really reasonable? How can one use such _?

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach requested a review from hubertp April 1, 2023 08:45
@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach force-pushed the wip/jtulach/CompilerTestsUpdate_5894 branch from a15b1f2 to ceaecc8 Compare April 1, 2023 11:18
Copy link
Member Author

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am satisfied with my PR. The grep shows no more pending tasks:

enso$ grep -r 5894 engine/runtime/src/test/

I believe it is ready for integration. Please review @4e6, @hubertp.

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach added the CI: Ready to merge This PR is eligible for automatic merge label Apr 1, 2023
@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach added the CI: Clean build required CI runners will be cleaned before and after this PR is built. label Apr 1, 2023
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 0d7682b into develop Apr 2, 2023
@mergify mergify bot deleted the wip/jtulach/CompilerTestsUpdate_5894 branch April 2, 2023 21:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CI: Clean build required CI runners will be cleaned before and after this PR is built. CI: No changelog needed Do not require a changelog entry for this PR. CI: Ready to merge This PR is eligible for automatic merge
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

21 compiler tests that relied on the old parser disabled
3 participants