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

fix test item-not-on-struct-fail's expected stderr to include error code #153

Conversation

phrohdoh
Copy link
Contributor

@phrohdoh phrohdoh commented Jan 20, 2021

Note that this sits on top of #150 (to avoid CI failing due to those issues) and if/once that is merged this should be rebased on top of then-master such that this PR contains only relevant commits. Of course if this is wanted without waiting on #150, those commits can be rebased away from this PR's head repo/branch as desired.

#150 has been merged and this PR has been rebased on top of the new master, so this can be merged.


What did you implement:

Testing compilation error of #[derive(Item)] on a non-struct (item-not-on-struct-fail) failed due to missing error code in the expected stderr content, so I've added the code.

How did you verify your change:

$ cargo t
...
test item-not-on-struct-fail.rs [should fail to compile] ... ok
...

@softprops
Copy link
Owner

Really appreciate the extra help on this

@softprops
Copy link
Owner

Merged the other change if you wanted to rebase I'll merge this

@phrohdoh phrohdoh force-pushed the fix-test_item-not-on-struct-fail_stderr-include-error-code branch from ac79206 to 6966e19 Compare January 20, 2021 18:44
@phrohdoh
Copy link
Contributor Author

Merged the other change if you wanted to rebase I'll merge this

Rebased!

@softprops softprops merged commit 16c61ae into softprops:master Jan 20, 2021
@phrohdoh phrohdoh deleted the fix-test_item-not-on-struct-fail_stderr-include-error-code branch January 20, 2021 19:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants