rust/src/test/run-make/graphviz-flowgraph/f04.dot-expected.dot

digraph block {
    N0[label="entry"];
    N1[label="exit"];
    N2[label="expr 4is"];
    N3[label="local _x"];
    N4[label="stmt let _x = 4is;"];
    N5[label="block { let _x = 4is; }"];
    N0 -> N2;
    N2 -> N3;
    N3 -> N4;
    N4 -> N5;
    N5 -> N1;
}
Unit tests for flowgraph pretty printing. Each test works by rendering the flowgraph for the last identified block we see in expanded pretty-printed output, and comparing it (via `diff`) against a checked in "foo.dot-expected.dot" file. Each test post-processes the output to remove NodeIds ` (id=NUM)` so that the expected output is somewhat stable (or at least independent of how we assign NodeIds) and easier for a human to interpret when looking at the expected output file itself. ---- Test writing style notes: I usually tried to write the tests in a way that would avoid duplicate labels in the output rendered flow graph, when possible. The tests that have string literals "unreachable" in the program text are deliberately written that way to remind the reader that the unreachable nodes in the resulting graph are not an error in the control flow computation, but rather a natural consequence of its construction. 2014-05-05 17:00:14 +02:00			`digraph block {`
			`N0[label="entry"];`
			`N1[label="exit"];`
test fallout from isize/usize 2014-12-05 18:12:25 -08:00			`N2[label="expr 4is"];`
Unit tests for flowgraph pretty printing. Each test works by rendering the flowgraph for the last identified block we see in expanded pretty-printed output, and comparing it (via `diff`) against a checked in "foo.dot-expected.dot" file. Each test post-processes the output to remove NodeIds ` (id=NUM)` so that the expected output is somewhat stable (or at least independent of how we assign NodeIds) and easier for a human to interpret when looking at the expected output file itself. ---- Test writing style notes: I usually tried to write the tests in a way that would avoid duplicate labels in the output rendered flow graph, when possible. The tests that have string literals "unreachable" in the program text are deliberately written that way to remind the reader that the unreachable nodes in the resulting graph are not an error in the control flow computation, but rather a natural consequence of its construction. 2014-05-05 17:00:14 +02:00			`N3[label="local _x"];`
test fallout from isize/usize 2014-12-05 18:12:25 -08:00			`N4[label="stmt let _x = 4is;"];`
			`N5[label="block { let _x = 4is; }"];`
Unit tests for flowgraph pretty printing. Each test works by rendering the flowgraph for the last identified block we see in expanded pretty-printed output, and comparing it (via `diff`) against a checked in "foo.dot-expected.dot" file. Each test post-processes the output to remove NodeIds ` (id=NUM)` so that the expected output is somewhat stable (or at least independent of how we assign NodeIds) and easier for a human to interpret when looking at the expected output file itself. ---- Test writing style notes: I usually tried to write the tests in a way that would avoid duplicate labels in the output rendered flow graph, when possible. The tests that have string literals "unreachable" in the program text are deliberately written that way to remind the reader that the unreachable nodes in the resulting graph are not an error in the control flow computation, but rather a natural consequence of its construction. 2014-05-05 17:00:14 +02:00			`N0 -> N2;`
			`N2 -> N3;`
			`N3 -> N4;`
Implement generalized object and type parameter bounds (Fixes #16462) 2014-08-27 21:46:52 -04:00			`N4 -> N5;`
			`N5 -> N1;`
Unit tests for flowgraph pretty printing. Each test works by rendering the flowgraph for the last identified block we see in expanded pretty-printed output, and comparing it (via `diff`) against a checked in "foo.dot-expected.dot" file. Each test post-processes the output to remove NodeIds ` (id=NUM)` so that the expected output is somewhat stable (or at least independent of how we assign NodeIds) and easier for a human to interpret when looking at the expected output file itself. ---- Test writing style notes: I usually tried to write the tests in a way that would avoid duplicate labels in the output rendered flow graph, when possible. The tests that have string literals "unreachable" in the program text are deliberately written that way to remind the reader that the unreachable nodes in the resulting graph are not an error in the control flow computation, but rather a natural consequence of its construction. 2014-05-05 17:00:14 +02:00			`}`