Skip to content

Conversation

@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

@jieyouxu jieyouxu commented Apr 8, 2025

For #137725.
r? ghost
@rustbot label +S-experimental

compiler-errors and others added 15 commits April 1, 2025 10:11
Co-authored-by: Oli Scherer <[email protected]>
Where the error relevant for these tests is emitted in
`report_selection_error` in `fulfillment_errors.rs`, there's a check
for the diagostic width.  If the explanation is too wide for that
width, it's moved to the `help` instead.  This was causing the results
from CI to not match the results observed in blessing the test
locally.

Let's update the relevant tests to fix this width and to test it both
in a `narrow` and in a `wide` configuration.

Thanks to jieyouxu for figuring this out.
@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. S-experimental Status: Ongoing experiment that does not require reviewing and won't be merged in its current state. labels Apr 8, 2025
@jieyouxu jieyouxu removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Apr 8, 2025
@jieyouxu jieyouxu mentioned this pull request Apr 9, 2025
//@ edition: 2024
//@ revisions: narrow wide
//@[narrow] compile-flags: --diagnostic-width=20
//@[wide] compile-flags: --diagnostic-width=300
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks almost like the test intentionally wants to cover different widths?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

(Yes, I'm just checking if the original version of the test passes without manually specifying diag width, since it failed in CI but not locally)

@jieyouxu jieyouxu closed this Apr 11, 2025
@jieyouxu jieyouxu deleted the exp/137725 branch April 11, 2025 09:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

S-experimental Status: Ongoing experiment that does not require reviewing and won't be merged in its current state. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants