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

Revision on hspec-expectations-pretty-diff places a lower bound on aeson than the one we already have #7433

Closed
1 task
mihaimaruseac opened this issue May 26, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@mihaimaruseac
Copy link
Contributor

mihaimaruseac commented May 26, 2024

Looking at https://hackage.haskell.org/package/hspec-expectations-pretty-diff-0.7.2.6/revisions/ we see that r1 has the following description

Changed the test suite 'tests' component's library dependency on 'aeson' from

>=0

to

<2

However, we have aeson-2.2.2.0 and hspec-expectations-pretty-diff-0.7.2.6 in the snapshot and no bounds issue (though we expect a failure from hspec-expectations-pretty-diff -- valpackett/hspec-expectations-pretty-diff#7).

As a result, we now have

aeson-2.2.2.0 (changelog) (Adam Bergmark adam@bergmark.nl @bergmark) is out of bounds for:

To fix this, I'll move hspec-expectations-pretty-diff from expected failure section to skipped test.

CC @Bodigrim as the author of the revision, in case a better solution exists.

mihaimaruseac added a commit that referenced this issue May 26, 2024
…o `skipped-tests` (#7433)

Signed-off-by: Mihai Maruseac <mihai.maruseac@gmail.com>
@Bodigrim
Copy link
Contributor

However, we have aeson-2.2.2.0 and hspec-expectations-pretty-diff-0.7.2.6 in the snapshot and no compilation failure

That's surprising.

test/Test/Hspec/Expectations/PrettySpec.hs:35:17: error: [GHC-83865]
    • Couldn't match expected type ‘Key’
                  with actual type ‘Data.Text.Internal.Text’
    • In the first argument of ‘(.=)’, namely ‘pack "foo"’
      In the expression: pack "foo" .= object [pack "bar" .= Number 123]
      In the first argument of ‘object’, namely
        ‘[pack "foo" .= object [pack "bar" .= Number 123]]’

@mihaimaruseac
Copy link
Contributor Author

As you mentioned in the other threads, it is because we are not actually compiling. I was wrong to say "no compilation failure", the correct phrase would have been "no bounds issues".

Closing as there's not much we can do. The test was already broken.

Thank you for the updates and for doing the revisions

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants