Use for instead of while in ascii.rs tests
#21862
Conversation
|
r? @brson (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
|
@bors: r+ 00d1 thanks! I don't know off hand the significance of the numbers here. |
|
⌛ Testing commit 00d1873 with merge 5368ab1... |
|
💔 Test failed - auto-win-64-nopt-t |
Gah. :( Though since this hasn't been merged in yet, I'm still curious about the |
|
@bors: retry |
|
⌛ Testing commit 00d1873 with merge 4668f51... |
|
💔 Test failed - auto-mac-64-opt |
|
@bors: retry |
I also noticed that all of the tests iterate through values up to 500. Just out of curiosity, was the choice of 500 arbitrary? I was thinking that it might make more sense to iterate up to 127 due to ASCII's character range (or if non-ASCII characters are being tested intentionally, either 255 or 511 for a nice `2^n - 1` value).
|
💔 Test failed - auto-win-64-nopt-t |
|
Are the build fails related to the changes I made in my PR? There seems to be an awful lot of fails. :/ |
|
@bors: retry Our automation is a ... little flaky sometimes :) |
|
@alexcrichton Ah, I see; just wanted to make sure that I didn't break anything! Is a specific cause for the automation failure known? (Could the build infrastructure be improved or are there no practical fixes?) |
|
⌛ Testing commit 00d1873 with merge ec280bc... |
|
💔 Test failed - auto-win-64-nopt-t |
|
@bors: retry rollup |
I also noticed that all of the tests iterate through values up to 500. Just out of curiosity, was the choice of 500 arbitrary? I was thinking that it might make more sense to iterate up to 127 due to ASCII's character range (or if non-ASCII characters are being tested intentionally, either 255 or 511 for a nice `2^n - 1` value).
While working on this PR, I also noticed that all of the tests iterate through values up to 500. Just out of curiosity, was the choice of 500 arbitrary? I was thinking that it might make more sense to iterate up to 127 due to ASCII's character range (or if non-ASCII characters are being tested intentionally, either 255 or 511 for a nice
2^n - 1value).