The `type_overflow` lint, doesn't catch the overflow for `i64` because
the overflow happens earlier in the parse phase when the `u64` as biggest
possible int gets casted to `i64` , without checking the for overflows.
We can't lint in the parse phase, so a refactoring of the `LitInt` type
was necessary.
The types `LitInt`, `LitUint` and `LitIntUnsuffixed` where merged to one
type `LitInt` which stores it's value as `u64`. An additional parameter was
added which indicate the signedness of the type and the sign of the value.
This breaks a fair amount of code. The typical patterns are:
* `for _ in range(0, 10)`: change to `for _ in range(0u, 10)`;
* `println!("{}", 3)`: change to `println!("{}", 3i)`;
* `[1, 2, 3].len()`: change to `[1i, 2, 3].len()`.
RFC #30. Closes#6023.
[breaking-change]
Integers are always parsed as a u64 in libsyntax, but they're stored as i64. The
parser and pretty printer both printed an i64 instead of u64, sometimes
introducing an extra negative sign.
* Added `// no-pretty-expanded` to pretty-print a test, but not run it through
the `expanded` variant.
* Removed #[deriving] and other expanded attributes after they are expanded
* Removed hacks around &str and &&str and friends (from both the parser and the
pretty printer).
* Un-ignored a bunch of tests
Also shuffles around the organization of numeric literals and types,
separating by int/uint/float instead of machine-vs-non-machine types.
This simplifies some code.
Closes#974Closes#1252
