Skip to content

enable tools to use test runners programmatically #39815

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 25, 2017

Conversation

oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

@oli-obk oli-obk commented Feb 14, 2017

No description provided.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @aturon

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@est31
Copy link
Member

est31 commented Feb 14, 2017

@oli-obk the travis CI error seems relevant.

@aturon aturon added the T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Feb 14, 2017
@aturon
Copy link
Member

aturon commented Feb 14, 2017

cc @rust-lang/libs, potential new public API surface.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

To be clear, this is an unstable library, so we're not committing to anything yet.

@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor Author

oli-obk commented Feb 14, 2017

To be clear, this is an unstable library, so we're not committing to anything yet.

I'm fully aware of this, but I believe that experimentation with the interface can help contribute to a potential future interface that will be stabilized.

@sfackler
Copy link
Member

What does this enable that use of the third party rustc-test crate doesn't?

@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor Author

oli-obk commented Feb 15, 2017

What does this enable that use of the third party rustc-test crate doesn't?

I thought rustc-test is just a copy of the internal crate, but with major version bumps instead of a stable API. I can submit this patch to the rustc-test crate, but it will make it much harder for @SimonSapin to update it, if the crate diverges too much from the internals crate.

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

For what it’s worth I haven’t updated rustc-test since I first made it. But yes, if you want to make major changes I’d suggest forking and making them in a separate crate. This specific PR seems small enough, though. I’d merge it in rustc-test, I don’t think it’s diverging enough to make merges difficult. I’ll also give you access to the repo and crates.io if you’re interested ;)

@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor Author

oli-obk commented Feb 15, 2017

I’ll also give you access to the repo and crates.io if you’re interested ;)

sgtm

This specific PR seems small enough, though. I’d merge it in rustc-test

I opened a PR there, feel free to close this PR if the extra API is deemed excessive for a rustc crate.

@aturon
Copy link
Member

aturon commented Feb 21, 2017

Ping @brson, I suspect you have opinions and want to check in before merging.

@aturon
Copy link
Member

aturon commented Feb 24, 2017

I'm going to go ahead and r+. @brson, if you want to revisit later, we can always revert; it's unstable.

@bors: r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 24, 2017

📌 Commit 80ac323 has been approved by aturon

GuillaumeGomez added a commit to GuillaumeGomez/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 24, 2017
enable tools to use test runners programmatically
frewsxcv added a commit to frewsxcv/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 24, 2017
enable tools to use test runners programmatically
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 24, 2017
Rollup of 17 pull requests

- Successful merges: #39777, #39815, #39845, #39886, #39892, #39903, #39905, #39914, #39927, #39940, #40010, #40030, #40048, #40050, #40052, #40060, #40071
- Failed merges:
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 25, 2017
Rollup of 11 pull requests

- Successful merges: #39777, #39815, #39845, #39886, #39940, #40010, #40030, #40048, #40050, #40052, #40071
- Failed merges:
@bors bors merged commit 80ac323 into rust-lang:master Feb 25, 2017
@oli-obk oli-obk deleted the patch-3 branch March 14, 2017 11:48
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants