rust/tests/ui/issues/issue-16671.rs

// run-pass

#![deny(warnings)]

fn foo<F: FnOnce()>(_f: F) { }

fn main() {
    let mut var = Vec::new();
    foo(move|| {
        var.push(1);
    });
}
Add `// run-pass` annotations to all the tests under `ui/run-pass/`. (I may have accidentally added it to some auxilliary crates as well; my emacs-macro-based methodology was pretty crude.) 2018-08-30 07:18:55 -05:00			`// run-pass`
Added test for spurious cannot borrow immutable item error with a closure 2017-11-30 17:16:17 -06:00
appveyor: Upgrade MinGW toolchains we use In debugging #40546 I was able to reproduce locally finally using the literal toolchain that the bots were using. I reproduced the error maybe 4 in 10 builds. I also have the 6.3.0 toolchain installed through `pacman` which has yet to have a failed build. When attempting to reproduce the bug with the toolchain that this commit switches to I was unable to reproduce anything after a few builds. I have no idea what the original problem was, but I'm hoping that it was just some random bug fixed somewhere along the way. I don't currently know of a technical reason to stick to the 4.9.2 toolchains we were previously using. Historcal 5.3.* toolchains would cause llvm to segfault (maybe a miscompile?) but this seems to have been fixed recently. To me if it passes CI then I think we're good. Closes #40546 2017-03-23 17:46:40 -05:00			`#![deny(warnings)]`
Ignore issue #16671 test on android Seems to be blocking forever 2014-12-05 22:22:35 -06:00
appveyor: Upgrade MinGW toolchains we use In debugging #40546 I was able to reproduce locally finally using the literal toolchain that the bots were using. I reproduced the error maybe 4 in 10 builds. I also have the 6.3.0 toolchain installed through `pacman` which has yet to have a failed build. When attempting to reproduce the bug with the toolchain that this commit switches to I was unable to reproduce anything after a few builds. I have no idea what the original problem was, but I'm hoping that it was just some random bug fixed somewhere along the way. I don't currently know of a technical reason to stick to the 4.9.2 toolchains we were previously using. Historcal 5.3.* toolchains would cause llvm to segfault (maybe a miscompile?) but this seems to have been fixed recently. To me if it passes CI then I think we're good. Closes #40546 2017-03-23 17:46:40 -05:00			`fn foo<F: FnOnce()>(_f: F) { }`
Ignore tests that use threads on emscripten 2016-02-11 05:34:41 -06:00
appveyor: Upgrade MinGW toolchains we use In debugging #40546 I was able to reproduce locally finally using the literal toolchain that the bots were using. I reproduced the error maybe 4 in 10 builds. I also have the 6.3.0 toolchain installed through `pacman` which has yet to have a failed build. When attempting to reproduce the bug with the toolchain that this commit switches to I was unable to reproduce anything after a few builds. I have no idea what the original problem was, but I'm hoping that it was just some random bug fixed somewhere along the way. I don't currently know of a technical reason to stick to the 4.9.2 toolchains we were previously using. Historcal 5.3.* toolchains would cause llvm to segfault (maybe a miscompile?) but this seems to have been fixed recently. To me if it passes CI then I think we're good. Closes #40546 2017-03-23 17:46:40 -05:00			`fn main() {`
Remove superfluous `;;` sequences 2017-05-24 21:43:46 -05:00			`let mut var = Vec::new();`
appveyor: Upgrade MinGW toolchains we use In debugging #40546 I was able to reproduce locally finally using the literal toolchain that the bots were using. I reproduced the error maybe 4 in 10 builds. I also have the 6.3.0 toolchain installed through `pacman` which has yet to have a failed build. When attempting to reproduce the bug with the toolchain that this commit switches to I was unable to reproduce anything after a few builds. I have no idea what the original problem was, but I'm hoping that it was just some random bug fixed somewhere along the way. I don't currently know of a technical reason to stick to the 4.9.2 toolchains we were previously using. Historcal 5.3.* toolchains would cause llvm to segfault (maybe a miscompile?) but this seems to have been fixed recently. To me if it passes CI then I think we're good. Closes #40546 2017-03-23 17:46:40 -05:00			`foo(move\|\| {`
			`var.push(1);`
			`});`
Add tests. 2014-08-22 12:16:26 -05:00			`}`