rust/tests/ui/structs-enums/enum-nullable-simplifycfg-misopt.rs

//@ run-pass

/*!
 * This is a regression test for a bug in LLVM, fixed in upstream r179587,
 * where the switch instructions generated for destructuring enums
 * represented with nullable pointers could be misoptimized in some cases.
 */

enum List<X> { Nil, Cons(X, #[allow(dead_code)] Box<List<X>>) }
pub fn main() {
    match List::Cons(10, Box::new(List::Nil)) {
        List::Cons(10, _) => {}
        List::Nil => {}
        _ => panic!()
    }
}
[AUTO-GENERATED] Migrate ui tests from `//` to `//@` directives 2024-02-16 20:02:50 +00:00			`//@ run-pass`
register snapshots 2013-10-23 08:49:18 +00:00
Reverse accidental src/llvm reversion in 876483dcf, and add test. The test is reduced from a doc test, but making it separate ensures that (1) unrelated changes to the docs won't leave this case uncovered, and (2) the nature of any future failures will be more obvious to whoever sees the tree on fire as a result. 2013-04-30 19:05:06 +00:00			`/*!`
			`* This is a regression test for a bug in LLVM, fixed in upstream r179587,`
			`* where the switch instructions generated for destructuring enums`
			`* represented with nullable pointers could be misoptimized in some cases.`
			`*/`

Adjust compiler tests for unused_tuple_struct_fields -> dead_code 2023-12-27 22:11:58 +00:00			`enum List<X> { Nil, Cons(X, #[allow(dead_code)] Box<List<X>>) }`
Reverse accidental src/llvm reversion in 876483dcf, and add test. The test is reduced from a doc test, but making it separate ensures that (1) unrelated changes to the docs won't leave this case uncovered, and (2) the nature of any future failures will be more obvious to whoever sees the tree on fire as a result. 2013-04-30 19:05:06 +00:00			`pub fn main() {`
Remove box syntax from most places in src/test outside of the issues dir 2021-08-25 00:39:40 +00:00			`match List::Cons(10, Box::new(List::Nil)) {`
Remove all `i` suffixes 2015-01-25 21:05:03 +00:00			`List::Cons(10, _) => {}`
Switch to purely namespaced enums This breaks code that referred to variant names in the same namespace as their enum. Reexport the variants in the old location or alter code to refer to the new locations: ``` pub enum Foo { A, B } fn main() { let a = A; } ``` => ``` pub use self::Foo::{A, B}; pub enum Foo { A, B } fn main() { let a = A; } ``` or ``` pub enum Foo { A, B } fn main() { let a = Foo::A; } ``` [breaking-change] 2014-11-06 08:05:53 +00:00			`List::Nil => {}`
Rename fail! to panic! https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/221 The current terminology of "task failure" often causes problems when writing or speaking about code. You often want to talk about the possibility of an operation that returns a Result "failing", but cannot because of the ambiguity with task failure. Instead, you have to speak of "the failing case" or "when the operation does not succeed" or other circumlocutions. Likewise, we use a "Failure" header in rustdoc to describe when operations may fail the task, but it would often be helpful to separate out a section describing the "Err-producing" case. We have been steadily moving away from task failure and toward Result as an error-handling mechanism, so we should optimize our terminology accordingly: Result-producing functions should be easy to describe. To update your code, rename any call to `fail!` to `panic!` instead. Assuming you have not created your own macro named `panic!`, this will work on UNIX based systems: grep -lZR 'fail!' . \| xargs -0 -l sed -i -e 's/fail!/panic!/g' You can of course also do this by hand. [breaking-change] 2014-10-09 19:17:22 +00:00			`_ => panic!()`
Reverse accidental src/llvm reversion in 876483dcf, and add test. The test is reduced from a doc test, but making it separate ensures that (1) unrelated changes to the docs won't leave this case uncovered, and (2) the nature of any future failures will be more obvious to whoever sees the tree on fire as a result. 2013-04-30 19:05:06 +00:00			`}`
			`}`