rust/tests/ui/binding/match-str.rs

// run-pass
#![allow(dead_code)]
// Issue #53
#![allow(non_camel_case_types)]


pub fn main() {
    match "test" { "not-test" => panic!(), "test" => (), _ => panic!() }

    enum t { tag1(String), tag2, }


    match t::tag1("test".to_string()) {
      t::tag2 => panic!(),
      t::tag1(ref s) if "test" != &**s => panic!(),
      t::tag1(ref s) if "test" == &**s => (),
      _ => panic!()
    }

    let x = match "a" { "a" => 1, "b" => 2, _ => panic!() };
    assert_eq!(x, 1);

    match "a" { "a" => { } "b" => { }, _ => 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`
Add `#![allow(..)]` as necessary to get re-migrated run-pass tests compiling with clean stderr again. Most were added mechanically. 2018-09-25 16:51:35 -05:00			`#![allow(dead_code)]`
test: Add test for string matching in pattern alts. Closes #53 2011-06-23 00:05:11 -05:00			`// Issue #53`
Add `#![allow(..)]` for a slew of lints of migrated run-pass tests, to silence stderr output. 2018-08-31 08:02:01 -05:00			`#![allow(non_camel_case_types)]`
test: Add test for string matching in pattern alts. Closes #53 2011-06-23 00:05:11 -05:00
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() {`
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			`match "test" { "not-test" => panic!(), "test" => (), _ => panic!() }`
test: Add test for string matching in pattern alts. Closes #53 2011-06-23 00:05:11 -05:00
core: rename strbuf::StrBuf to string::String [breaking-change] 2014-05-22 18:57:53 -05:00			`enum t { tag1(String), tag2, }`
test: Add test for string matching in pattern alts. Closes #53 2011-06-23 00:05:11 -05:00
Reformat for new syntax 2011-07-27 07:19:39 -05:00
Switch to purely namespaced enums This breaks code that referred to variant names in the same namespace as their enum. Reexport the variants in the old location or alter code to refer to the new locations: ``` pub enum Foo { A, B } fn main() { let a = A; } ``` => ``` pub use self::Foo::{A, B}; pub enum Foo { A, B } fn main() { let a = A; } ``` or ``` pub enum Foo { A, B } fn main() { let a = Foo::A; } ``` [breaking-change] 2014-11-06 02:05:53 -06:00			`match t::tag1("test".to_string()) {`
			`t::tag2 => panic!(),`
cleanup: replace `as[_mut]_slice()` calls with deref coercions 2015-02-01 20:53:25 -06:00			`t::tag1(ref s) if "test" != &**s => panic!(),`
			`t::tag1(ref s) if "test" == &**s => (),`
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			`_ => panic!()`
Reformat for new syntax 2011-07-27 07:19:39 -05:00			`}`
Allow istrs as patterns. Issue #855 2011-09-01 00:34:41 -05:00
Remove all `i` suffixes 2015-01-25 15:05:03 -06:00			`let x = match "a" { "a" => 1, "b" => 2, _ => panic!() };`
Use assert_eq! rather than assert! where possible 2013-05-18 21:02:45 -05:00			`assert_eq!(x, 1);`
Allow istrs as patterns. Issue #855 2011-09-01 00:34:41 -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			`match "a" { "a" => { } "b" => { }, _ => panic!() }`
Allow istrs as patterns. Issue #855 2011-09-01 00:34:41 -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			`}`