-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 558
Document more compiletest headers. #1249
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
Conversation
044fc38
to
8effd43
Compare
Co-authored-by: pierwill <19642016+pierwill@users.noreply.github.com>
Thanks for taking a look! I have applied the suggestions. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm learning about most of these headers for the first time, so I didn't check for accuracy, but it looks good to me aside from that. I left a few nits.
Would it make sense to alphabetize this list to make it easier to skim?
Also, is there someone who can check to make sure the descriptions are accurate?
* `force-host` will force the test to build for the host platform instead of | ||
the target. This is useful primarily for auxiliary proc-macros, which need | ||
to be loaded by the host compiler. | ||
* `pretty-mode` specifies the mode pretty-print tests should run in. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IIRC, all tests >=check-pass
are also run as pretty-print tests. Is that correct? If so, does pretty-mode
affect those too?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Unless I'm mistaken, the pretty-print checks that ran on all tests were removed several years ago. The only pretty-print tests now are those in the src/test/pretty
directory.
There are a bunch of // pretty-expanded
comment headers sprinkled across the testsuite, but those are vestigial.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, I didn't realize that. Good to know, thanks.
Thanks for taking a look!
As mentioned on Zulip (here), I'd like to work on reorganizing the testing chapter. As part of that, I'd like to break this list up into different topics (for example, the pretty-print headers, debugger headers, incremental, etc.). I'd like to get this merged before I start on that. |
Sure, thanks for making this PR :)
Sounds good. |
@petrochenkov could you review this to check accuracy? I'm not super familiar with all the different headers. |
@camelid same here, I think this is good enough to merge and we can fix it later if necessary |
This adds some more documentation for compiletest headers.