rust/tests/ui/binding/expr-match-panic-all.rs

// run-pass


// When all branches of a match expression result in panic, the entire
// match expression results in panic.

pub fn main() {
    let _x =
        match true {
          true => { 10 }
          false => { match true { true => { panic!() } false => { panic!() } } }
        };
}
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`
Reformat source tree (minus a couple tests that are still grumpy). 2011-06-15 13:19:50 -05:00


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 14:17:22 -05:00			`// When all branches of a match expression result in panic, the entire`
			`// match expression results in panic.`
rustdoc: Replace no-pretty-expanded with pretty-expanded Now that features must be declared expanded source often does not compile. This adds 'pretty-expanded' to a bunch of test cases that still work. 2015-03-22 15:13:15 -05:00
check-fast fallout from removing export, r=burningtree 2013-02-01 21:43:17 -06:00			`pub fn main() {`
Fix warnings it tests 2013-08-17 10:37:42 -05:00			`let _x =`
Convert alt to match. Stop parsing alt 2012-08-06 14:34:08 -05:00			`match true {`
Remove all `i` suffixes 2015-01-25 15:05:03 -06:00			`true => { 10 }`
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 14:17:22 -05:00			`false => { match true { true => { panic!() } false => { panic!() } } }`
Reformat source tree (minus a couple tests that are still grumpy). 2011-06-15 13:19:50 -05:00			`};`
Reformat This changes the indexing syntax from .() to [], the vector syntax from ~[] to [] and the extension syntax from #fmt() to #fmt[] 2011-08-19 17:16:48 -05:00			`}`