nordic-dev.net/rust
nordic-dev.net/rust
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust.git synced 2025-04-30 20:17:50 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
aca6dba6d1
rust/tests/coverage/issue-84561.cov-map

207 lines
12 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Function name: <issue_84561::Foo as core::fmt::Debug>::fmt
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
Raw bytes (27): 0x[01, 01, 01, 01, 05, 04, 01, 8a, 01, 05, 01, 25, 05, 01, 25, 00, 26, 02, 01, 09, 00, 0f, 01, 01, 05, 00, 06]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
Number of expressions: 1
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- expression 0 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(1)
Number of file 0 mappings: 4
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-16 02:40:01 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 138, 5) to (start + 1, 37)
coverage: Handle fn signature spans more consistently near `?`
2023-10-17 07:58:35 +00:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 1, 37) to (start + 0, 38)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Expression(0, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 0, 15)
= (c0 - c1)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 6)
coverage: Include the highest counter ID seen in `.cov-map` dumps When making changes that have a large impact on coverage counter creation, this makes it easier to see whether the number of physical counters has changed. (The highest counter ID seen in coverage maps is not necessarily the same as the number of physical counters actually used by the instrumented code, but it's the best approximation we can get from looking only at the coverage maps, and it should be reasonably accurate in most cases.)
2024-10-08 02:13:05 +00:00
Highest counter ID seen: c1
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Function name: issue_84561::main
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-16 02:40:01 +00:00
Raw bytes (10): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, b4, 01, 01, 04, 02]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-16 02:40:01 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 180, 1) to (start + 4, 2)
coverage: Include the highest counter ID seen in `.cov-map` dumps When making changes that have a large impact on coverage counter creation, this makes it easier to see whether the number of physical counters has changed. (The highest counter ID seen in coverage maps is not necessarily the same as the number of physical counters actually used by the instrumented code, but it's the best approximation we can get from looking only at the coverage maps, and it should be reasonably accurate in most cases.)
2024-10-08 02:13:05 +00:00
Highest counter ID seen: c0
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Function name: issue_84561::test1
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
Raw bytes (50): 0x[01, 01, 00, 09, 01, 9a, 01, 01, 01, 0b, 05, 01, 0c, 00, 1e, 01, 01, 05, 00, 0b, 09, 00, 0c, 00, 1e, 01, 01, 0d, 01, 0b, 0d, 01, 0c, 00, 1e, 01, 01, 05, 03, 0b, 11, 03, 0c, 00, 1e, 01, 01, 01, 00, 02]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
Number of expressions: 0
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of file 0 mappings: 9
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-16 02:40:01 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 154, 1) to (start + 1, 11)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 1, 12) to (start + 0, 30)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 11)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 0, 12) to (start + 0, 30)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 1, 11)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(3)) at (prev + 1, 12) to (start + 0, 30)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 3, 11)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(4)) at (prev + 3, 12) to (start + 0, 30)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 1) to (start + 0, 2)
coverage: Include the highest counter ID seen in `.cov-map` dumps When making changes that have a large impact on coverage counter creation, this makes it easier to see whether the number of physical counters has changed. (The highest counter ID seen in coverage maps is not necessarily the same as the number of physical counters actually used by the instrumented code, but it's the best approximation we can get from looking only at the coverage maps, and it should be reasonably accurate in most cases.)
2024-10-08 02:13:05 +00:00
Highest counter ID seen: c4
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Function name: issue_84561::test2
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
Raw bytes (20): 0x[01, 01, 00, 03, 01, b0, 01, 01, 01, 10, 05, 01, 11, 00, 23, 01, 01, 01, 00, 02]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
Number of expressions: 0
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of file 0 mappings: 3
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-16 02:40:01 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 176, 1) to (start + 1, 16)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 1, 17) to (start + 0, 35)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 1) to (start + 0, 2)
coverage: Include the highest counter ID seen in `.cov-map` dumps When making changes that have a large impact on coverage counter creation, this makes it easier to see whether the number of physical counters has changed. (The highest counter ID seen in coverage maps is not necessarily the same as the number of physical counters actually used by the instrumented code, but it's the best approximation we can get from looking only at the coverage maps, and it should be reasonably accurate in most cases.)
2024-10-08 02:13:05 +00:00
Highest counter ID seen: c1
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Function name: issue_84561::test2::call_print
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-16 02:40:01 +00:00
Raw bytes (10): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, a7, 01, 09, 02, 0a]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-16 02:40:01 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 167, 9) to (start + 2, 10)
coverage: Include the highest counter ID seen in `.cov-map` dumps When making changes that have a large impact on coverage counter creation, this makes it easier to see whether the number of physical counters has changed. (The highest counter ID seen in coverage maps is not necessarily the same as the number of physical counters actually used by the instrumented code, but it's the best approximation we can get from looking only at the coverage maps, and it should be reasonably accurate in most cases.)
2024-10-08 02:13:05 +00:00
Highest counter ID seen: c0
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Function name: issue_84561::test3
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
Raw bytes (414): 0x[01, 01, 3b, 05, 09, 0d, 11, 15, 19, 1e, 1d, 15, 19, 1a, 21, 1e, 1d, 15, 19, 25, 2d, 21, 25, 29, 35, 32, 29, 21, 25, 31, 39, 3d, 41, 42, 45, 3d, 41, 66, 49, 45, 4d, 63, 51, 66, 49, 45, 4d, 5e, 55, 63, 51, 66, 49, 45, 4d, 9e, 01, 55, 51, 59, 9e, 01, 55, 51, 59, 9b, 01, 5d, 9e, 01, 55, 51, 59, 9b, 01, 61, 9e, 01, 55, 51, 59, 96, 01, 65, 9b, 01, 61, 9e, 01, 55, 51, 59, 75, e2, 01, e6, 01, 79, 69, 6d, 69, 6d, 69, 6d, e6, 01, 00, 69, 6d, e6, 01, 79, 69, 6d, df, 01, 7d, 75, e2, 01, e6, 01, 79, 69, 6d, da, 01, 81, 01, df, 01, 7d, 75, e2, 01, e6, 01, 79, 69, 6d, 81, 01, 85, 01, 33, 01, 08, 01, 03, 1c, 05, 04, 09, 01, 1c, 02, 02, 05, 04, 1f, 0d, 05, 05, 00, 1f, 06, 01, 05, 00, 1f, 15, 01, 09, 01, 1c, 1e, 02, 05, 00, 1f, 1a, 01, 05, 00, 0f, 16, 00, 20, 00, 30, 21, 01, 05, 03, 0f, 25, 03, 20, 00, 30, 2d, 00, 33, 00, 41, 22, 00, 4b, 00, 5a, 32, 01, 05, 00, 0f, 29, 05, 09, 03, 10, 35, 05, 0d, 00, 1b, 2a, 02, 0d, 00, 1c, 2e, 04, 09, 05, 06, 31, 06, 05, 03, 06, 36, 04, 05, 03, 06, 3d, 04, 09, 04, 06, 42, 05, 08, 00, 0f, 45, 01, 09, 03, 0a, 3e, 05, 09, 03, 0a, 63, 05, 08, 00, 0f, 51, 01, 09, 00, 13, 59, 03, 0d, 00, 1d, 5e, 03, 09, 00, 13, 5a, 03, 0d, 00, 1d, 9b, 01, 03, 05, 00, 0f, 9b, 01, 01, 0c, 00, 13, 5d, 01, 0d, 00, 13, 7a, 02, 0d, 00, 13, 96, 01, 04, 05, 02, 13, 65, 03, 0d, 00, 13, 92, 01, 02, 0d, 00, 13, df, 01, 03, 05, 00, 0f, 69, 01, 0c, 00, 13, 6d, 01, 0d, 03, 0e, 75, 04, 0d, 00, 13, e6, 01, 02, 0d, 00, 17, e6, 01, 01, 14, 00, 1b, 00, 01, 15, 00, 1b, b6, 01, 02, 15, 00, 1b, e2, 01, 04, 0d, 00, 13, 7d, 03, 09, 00, 19, da, 01, 02, 05, 00, 0f, d6, 01, 03, 09, 00, 22, 81, 01, 02, 05, 00, 0f, ea, 01, 03, 09, 00, 2c, 85, 01, 02, 01, 00, 02]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
Number of expressions: 59
update coverage test
2024-06-25 22:06:27 +00:00
- expression 0 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(2)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- expression 1 operands: lhs = Counter(3), rhs = Counter(4)
update coverage test
2024-06-25 22:06:27 +00:00
- expression 2 operands: lhs = Counter(5), rhs = Counter(6)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- expression 3 operands: lhs = Expression(7, Sub), rhs = Counter(7)
update coverage test
2024-06-25 22:06:27 +00:00
- expression 4 operands: lhs = Counter(5), rhs = Counter(6)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- expression 5 operands: lhs = Expression(6, Sub), rhs = Counter(8)
- expression 6 operands: lhs = Expression(7, Sub), rhs = Counter(7)
- expression 7 operands: lhs = Counter(5), rhs = Counter(6)
- expression 8 operands: lhs = Counter(9), rhs = Counter(11)
- expression 9 operands: lhs = Counter(8), rhs = Counter(9)
- expression 10 operands: lhs = Counter(10), rhs = Counter(13)
- expression 11 operands: lhs = Expression(12, Sub), rhs = Counter(10)
- expression 12 operands: lhs = Counter(8), rhs = Counter(9)
- expression 13 operands: lhs = Counter(12), rhs = Counter(14)
- expression 14 operands: lhs = Counter(15), rhs = Counter(16)
- expression 15 operands: lhs = Expression(16, Sub), rhs = Counter(17)
- expression 16 operands: lhs = Counter(15), rhs = Counter(16)
- expression 17 operands: lhs = Expression(25, Sub), rhs = Counter(18)
- expression 18 operands: lhs = Counter(17), rhs = Counter(19)
- expression 19 operands: lhs = Expression(24, Add), rhs = Counter(20)
- expression 20 operands: lhs = Expression(25, Sub), rhs = Counter(18)
- expression 21 operands: lhs = Counter(17), rhs = Counter(19)
- expression 22 operands: lhs = Expression(23, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
- expression 23 operands: lhs = Expression(24, Add), rhs = Counter(20)
- expression 24 operands: lhs = Expression(25, Sub), rhs = Counter(18)
- expression 25 operands: lhs = Counter(17), rhs = Counter(19)
- expression 26 operands: lhs = Expression(39, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
- expression 27 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Counter(22)
- expression 28 operands: lhs = Expression(39, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
- expression 29 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Counter(22)
- expression 30 operands: lhs = Expression(38, Add), rhs = Counter(23)
- expression 31 operands: lhs = Expression(39, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
- expression 32 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Counter(22)
- expression 33 operands: lhs = Expression(38, Add), rhs = Counter(24)
- expression 34 operands: lhs = Expression(39, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
- expression 35 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Counter(22)
- expression 36 operands: lhs = Expression(37, Sub), rhs = Counter(25)
- expression 37 operands: lhs = Expression(38, Add), rhs = Counter(24)
- expression 38 operands: lhs = Expression(39, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
- expression 39 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Counter(22)
- expression 40 operands: lhs = Counter(29), rhs = Expression(56, Sub)
- expression 41 operands: lhs = Expression(57, Sub), rhs = Counter(30)
- expression 42 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
- expression 43 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- expression 44 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 45 operands: lhs = Expression(57, Sub), rhs = Zero
- expression 46 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 47 operands: lhs = Expression(57, Sub), rhs = Counter(30)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
- expression 48 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- expression 49 operands: lhs = Expression(55, Add), rhs = Counter(31)
- expression 50 operands: lhs = Counter(29), rhs = Expression(56, Sub)
- expression 51 operands: lhs = Expression(57, Sub), rhs = Counter(30)
- expression 52 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 53 operands: lhs = Expression(54, Sub), rhs = Counter(32)
- expression 54 operands: lhs = Expression(55, Add), rhs = Counter(31)
- expression 55 operands: lhs = Counter(29), rhs = Expression(56, Sub)
- expression 56 operands: lhs = Expression(57, Sub), rhs = Counter(30)
- expression 57 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 58 operands: lhs = Counter(32), rhs = Counter(33)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of file 0 mappings: 51
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-16 02:40:01 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 8, 1) to (start + 3, 28)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 4, 9) to (start + 1, 28)
- Code(Expression(0, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 5) to (start + 4, 31)
update coverage test
2024-06-25 22:06:27 +00:00
= (c1 - c2)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(3)) at (prev + 5, 5) to (start + 0, 31)
- Code(Expression(1, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 31)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
= (c3 - c4)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(5)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 1, 28)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(7, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 5) to (start + 0, 31)
update coverage test
2024-06-25 22:06:27 +00:00
= (c5 - c6)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(6, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
= ((c5 - c6) - c7)
- Code(Expression(5, Sub)) at (prev + 0, 32) to (start + 0, 48)
= (((c5 - c6) - c7) - c8)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(8)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 3, 15)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Counter(9)) at (prev + 3, 32) to (start + 0, 48)
- Code(Counter(11)) at (prev + 0, 51) to (start + 0, 65)
- Code(Expression(8, Sub)) at (prev + 0, 75) to (start + 0, 90)
= (c9 - c11)
- Code(Expression(12, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
= (c8 - c9)
- Code(Counter(10)) at (prev + 5, 9) to (start + 3, 16)
- Code(Counter(13)) at (prev + 5, 13) to (start + 0, 27)
- Code(Expression(10, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 13) to (start + 0, 28)
= (c10 - c13)
- Code(Expression(11, Sub)) at (prev + 4, 9) to (start + 5, 6)
= ((c8 - c9) - c10)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(12)) at (prev + 6, 5) to (start + 3, 6)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(13, Sub)) at (prev + 4, 5) to (start + 3, 6)
= (c12 - c14)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(15)) at (prev + 4, 9) to (start + 4, 6)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(16, Sub)) at (prev + 5, 8) to (start + 0, 15)
= (c15 - c16)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(17)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 3, 10)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(15, Sub)) at (prev + 5, 9) to (start + 3, 10)
= ((c15 - c16) - c17)
- Code(Expression(24, Add)) at (prev + 5, 8) to (start + 0, 15)
= ((c17 - c19) + c18)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(20)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 0, 19)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Counter(22)) at (prev + 3, 13) to (start + 0, 29)
- Code(Expression(23, Sub)) at (prev + 3, 9) to (start + 0, 19)
= (((c17 - c19) + c18) - c20)
- Code(Expression(22, Sub)) at (prev + 3, 13) to (start + 0, 29)
= ((((c17 - c19) + c18) - c20) - c21)
- Code(Expression(38, Add)) at (prev + 3, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
= ((c20 - c22) + c21)
- Code(Expression(38, Add)) at (prev + 1, 12) to (start + 0, 19)
= ((c20 - c22) + c21)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(23)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(30, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
= (((c20 - c22) + c21) - c23)
- Code(Expression(37, Sub)) at (prev + 4, 5) to (start + 2, 19)
= (((c20 - c22) + c21) - c24)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(25)) at (prev + 3, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(36, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
= ((((c20 - c22) + c21) - c24) - c25)
- Code(Expression(55, Add)) at (prev + 3, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
= (c29 + ((c26 - c27) - c30))
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(26)) at (prev + 1, 12) to (start + 0, 19)
- Code(Counter(27)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 3, 14)
- Code(Counter(29)) at (prev + 4, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(57, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 13) to (start + 0, 23)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
= (c26 - c27)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(57, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 20) to (start + 0, 27)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
= (c26 - c27)
Enable by default.
2023-01-18 17:57:50 +00:00
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 1, 21) to (start + 0, 27)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(45, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 21) to (start + 0, 27)
Enable by default.
2023-01-18 17:57:50 +00:00
= ((c26 - c27) - Zero)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(56, Sub)) at (prev + 4, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
= ((c26 - c27) - c30)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(31)) at (prev + 3, 9) to (start + 0, 25)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(54, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
= ((c29 + ((c26 - c27) - c30)) - c31)
comment out the old tests instead of adjusting them
2024-11-25 19:38:57 +00:00
- Code(Expression(53, Sub)) at (prev + 3, 9) to (start + 0, 34)
= (((c29 + ((c26 - c27) - c30)) - c31) - c32)
- Code(Counter(32)) at (prev + 2, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
- Code(Expression(58, Sub)) at (prev + 3, 9) to (start + 0, 44)
= (c32 - c33)
- Code(Counter(33)) at (prev + 2, 1) to (start + 0, 2)
Highest counter ID seen: c33
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink