rust/tests/ui/issues/issue-26237.stderr

error[E0618]: expected function, found `{integer}`
  --> $DIR/issue-26237.rs:10:18
   |
LL |         $not_a_function($some_argument)
   |         ------------------------------- call expression requires function
...
LL |     let mut value_a = 0;
   |         ----------- `value_a` has type `{integer}`
LL |     let mut value_b = 0;
LL |     macro_panic!(value_a, value_b);
   |                  ^^^^^^^

error: aborting due to previous error

For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0618`.
Move some `compile-fail` tests to `ui` 2018-07-15 21:11:54 +00:00			error[E0618]: expected function, found `{integer}`
Remove licenses 2018-12-25 15:56:47 +00:00			`--> $DIR/issue-26237.rs:10:18`
Move some `compile-fail` tests to `ui` 2018-07-15 21:11:54 +00:00			`\|`
			`LL \| $not_a_function($some_argument)`
in which the E0618 "expected function" diagnostic gets a makeover Now the main span focuses on the erroneous not-a-function callee, while showing the entire call expression is relegated to a secondary span. In the case where the erroneous callee is itself a call, we point out the definition, and, if the call expression spans multiple lines, tentatively suggest a semicolon (because we suspect that the "outer" call is actually supposed to be a tuple). The new `bug!` assertion is, in fact, safe (`confirm_builtin_call` is only called by `check_call`, which is only called with a first arg of kind `ExprKind::Call` in `check_expr_kind`). Resolves #51055. 2018-11-11 04:46:05 +00:00			`\| ------------------------------- call expression requires function`
Move some `compile-fail` tests to `ui` 2018-07-15 21:11:54 +00:00			`...`
			`LL \| let mut value_a = 0;`
add helpful error notes and fix the false 'defined here' messages 2021-02-17 14:50:59 +00:00			\| ----------- `value_a` has type `{integer}`
Move some `compile-fail` tests to `ui` 2018-07-15 21:11:54 +00:00			`LL \| let mut value_b = 0;`
			`LL \| macro_panic!(value_a, value_b);`
in which the E0618 "expected function" diagnostic gets a makeover Now the main span focuses on the erroneous not-a-function callee, while showing the entire call expression is relegated to a secondary span. In the case where the erroneous callee is itself a call, we point out the definition, and, if the call expression spans multiple lines, tentatively suggest a semicolon (because we suspect that the "outer" call is actually supposed to be a tuple). The new `bug!` assertion is, in fact, safe (`confirm_builtin_call` is only called by `check_call`, which is only called with a first arg of kind `ExprKind::Call` in `check_expr_kind`). Resolves #51055. 2018-11-11 04:46:05 +00:00			`\| ^^^^^^^`
Move some `compile-fail` tests to `ui` 2018-07-15 21:11:54 +00:00
			`error: aborting due to previous error`

			For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0618`.