-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Make it more clear which module is being tested when running cargo test #9195
Conversation
(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
test_path | ||
.strip_prefix(unit.pkg.root()) | ||
.unwrap_or(&test_path) | ||
.display(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this returns an opaque struct that implements Display, which I think makes it harder to collapse these 2 format!
's into 1 unless I to_string()
this call and the "unittests"
&has str, let me know what people would prefer
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nah this seems fine I think, no need to worry too much about perf here!
@rfcbot fcp merge Thanks for the PR! This looks good to me and I think it's pretty reasonable! I've cc'd other folks on the Cargo team to get their thoughts too since this is changing the output of Cargo by default. |
Team member @alexcrichton has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members: No concerns currently listed. Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me. |
This looks great, thank you! I'm glad to see test output being made more helpful. @rfcbot reviewed |
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit 04c8372 has been approved by |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Update cargo 11 commits in bf5a5d5e5d3ae842a63bfce6d070dfd438cf6070..572e201536dc2e4920346e28037b63c0f4d88b3c 2021-02-18 15:49:14 +0000 to 2021-02-24 16:51:20 +0000 - Pass the error message format to rustdoc (rust-lang/cargo#9128) - Fix test target_in_environment_contains_lower_case (rust-lang/cargo#9203) - Fix hang on broken stderr. (rust-lang/cargo#9201) - Make it more clear which module is being tested when running cargo test (rust-lang/cargo#9195) - Updates to edition handling. (rust-lang/cargo#9184) - Add --cfg and --rustc-cfg flags to output compiler configuration (rust-lang/cargo#9002) - Run rustdoc doctests relative to the workspace (rust-lang/cargo#9105) - Add support for [env] section in .cargo/config.toml (rust-lang/cargo#9175) - Add schema field and `features2` to the index. (rust-lang/cargo#9161) - Document the default location where cargo install emitting build artifacts (rust-lang/cargo#9189) - Do not exit prematurely if anything failed installing. (rust-lang/cargo#9185)
I recently asked in zulip if this is a good idea, as I find it hard to find the module thats being tested from the complex path with the hash.
Output of
cargo test
: