Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Replace hardcoded forward slash with path::MAIN_SEPARATOR - #40620
Conversation
rust-highfive
commented
Mar 17, 2017
r? @BurntSushi (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 18, 2017
@bors r+ |
bors
commented
Mar 18, 2017
📌 Commit cb4f536 has been approved by |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 18, 2017
@laumann Thanks! |
laumann
commented
Mar 18, 2017
@BurntSushi Thank you :-) Also came across https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/libsyntax/parse/parser.rs#L5307 - can it be fixed here or is it too late? |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 18, 2017
@bors r- |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 18, 2017
@laumann Probably not a good idea to add commits after a PR has been r+'d. I think it will rightyfully cause the PR to fail to merge. The new changes look OK. Could you please squash them down to a single commit please? |
laumann
commented
Mar 18, 2017
@BurntSushi OK, can I fix it here, or should I open a new PR? |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 18, 2017
@laumann You can fix it here by squashing your branch locally (probably with a rebase) and then force pushing. |
laumann
commented
Mar 18, 2017
OK, no problem, thanks :-) |
laumann
commented
Mar 19, 2017
Rebased. Something went wrong with https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/jobs/212496260, but I can't really tell what. |
bors
commented
Mar 19, 2017
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #40346) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 19, 2017
@laumann You need to merge changes from master back into this PR because someone else has made changes since submitting your PR that conflict with your changes. You can do this by checking out your |
laumann
commented
Mar 19, 2017
@BurntSushi Rebased. |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 19, 2017
@laumann Thanks! |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 19, 2017
@bors r+ |
bors
commented
Mar 19, 2017
📌 Commit 4f0141b has been approved by |
frewsxcv
commented
Mar 20, 2017
I think this is causing a test failure on Windows: https://ci.appveyor.com/project/rust-lang/rust/build/1.0.2460/job/kfyqxp0uxi22y3lk @bors r- |
laumann
commented
Mar 20, 2017
@frewsxcv You are right - it looks like Why is that test in parse-fail and not compile-fail? |
laumann
commented
Mar 20, 2017
It seems the issue can be fixed several ways, but which one would be preferred?
and add
But I'm wondering what the preferred approach is... I tried fiddling with But that trick didn't work :-) |
laumann
commented
Mar 20, 2017
@BurntSushi Should I prefer to amend the existing commit, or should I just add new ones (to fix the test)? |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 20, 2017
@laumann Amend the existing commit. We shouldn't have broken commits. :-) |
laumann
commented
Mar 21, 2017
@BurntSushi The build failed, but I can't really tell why - is there some way to try again? |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 21, 2017
@laumann I kicked it. |
laumann
commented
Mar 21, 2017
@BurntSushi Yay! Thanks :-) |
laumann
commented
Mar 28, 2017
@frewsxcv It should be fixed now, not sure if I need to do anything else. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It doesn't seem OK to ignore this test on Windows.
@alexcrichton What should we do here? This PR is changing a few places to use the native path separator when printing file paths, so I assume this test is failing because the error messages don't compare equal. Is there a way to do conditional testing based on platform?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I now see that there is another test in this PR, mod_file_not_exist_windows.rs, which essentially does this. But it's done by exhausting every non-Windows platform. Is that the right way to do this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@BurntSushi I considered different approaches - this could maybe be turned into a run-make test instead.
I went for this solution, because I looked at src/test/codegen/dllimports/main.rs (and others) that do windows-specific things by exhausting the other options.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Precedence is good enough for me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you :-)
Ah, of course, you have to r+ it! I was wondering why it wasn't being tested again...
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 28, 2017
@bors r+ |
bors
commented
Mar 28, 2017
📌 Commit 25130da has been approved by |
bors
commented
Mar 29, 2017
🔒 Merge conflict |
laumann
commented
Mar 30, 2017
@BurntSushi Should I rebase again? |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 30, 2017
Yup. Looks like something else got merged that conflicts with this, so you'll need to rebase to resolve conflicts. |
laumann
commented
Mar 30, 2017
Will do |
laumann
commented
Mar 30, 2017
Seems to be good now. 🤞 |
BurntSushi
commented
Mar 30, 2017
@bors retry |
alexcrichton
commented
Mar 30, 2017
@bors: r=BurntSushi |
bors
commented
Mar 30, 2017
📌 Commit b376386 has been approved by |
bors
commented
Mar 31, 2017
Replace hardcoded forward slash with path::MAIN_SEPARATOR Fixes#40149
bors
commented
Mar 31, 2017
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
Fixes#40149