Yuki Okushi 343a094aa1 Rollup merge of #84897 - richkadel:cover-closure-macros, r=tmandry ... Coverage instruments closure bodies in macros (not the macro body) Fixes: #84884 This solution might be considered a compromise, but I think it is the better choice. The results in the `closure.rs` test correctly resolve all test cases broken as described in #84884. One test pattern (in both `closure_macro.rs` and `closure_macro_async.rs`) was also affected, and removes coverage statistics for the lines inside the closure, because the closure includes a macro. (The coverage remains at the callsite of the macro, so we lose some detail, but there isn't a perfect choice with macros. Often macro implementations are split across the macro and the callsite, and there doesn't appear to be a single "right choice" for which body should be covered. For the current implementation, we can't do both. The callsite is most likely to be the preferred site for coverage. r? `@tmandry` cc: `@wesleywiser`		2021-05-07 15:20:26 +09:00
..
src	Rollup merge of #84897 - richkadel:cover-closure-macros, r=tmandry	2021-05-07 15:20:26 +09:00
Cargo.toml	bumped smallvec deps	2021-02-14 18:03:11 +03:00