1. 26 9月, 2016 6 次提交
  2. 25 9月, 2016 13 次提交
  3. 24 9月, 2016 15 次提交
  4. 23 9月, 2016 6 次提交
    • B
      Auto merge of #36335 - mcarton:compiletest, r=GuillaumeGomez · 86a686c4
      bors 提交于
      Fix ICE test in compiletest fail-tests
      
      While working on Clippy which uses *compiletest*, I noticed that as long as all expected error are found, *compile-fail* tests will be marked *ok* even if there is an ICE. One function seems to have not been updated with JSON errors because ICEs are now reported like this:
      ```json
      {"message":"../src/librustc/ty/context.rs:161: Attempted to intern `_` which contains inference types/regions in the global type context","code":null,"level":"error: internal compiler error","spans":[],"children":[],"rendered":null}
      ```
      I don't think I can add a test for that.
      
      I guess:
      r? @nikomatsakis
      86a686c4
    • C
      Minor `VecDeque` doc examples cleanup. · 3b973443
      Corey Farwell 提交于
      3b973443
    • J
      Load extern crates in `resolve`. · 7b5c59ea
      Jeffrey Seyfried 提交于
      7b5c59ea
    • B
      Auto merge of #36631 - frewsxcv:dir-entry-debug, r=sfackler · f2c53ea6
      bors 提交于
      Implement Debug for DirEntry.
      
      None
      f2c53ea6
    • B
      Auto merge of #36573 - jseyfried:groundwork, r=nrc · 533c04db
      bors 提交于
      resolve: groundwork for building the module graph during expansion
      
      r? @nrc
      533c04db
    • B
      Auto merge of #36154 - nrc:proc-macro-init, r=@jseyfried · 3a5d975f
      bors 提交于
      Adds a `ProcMacro` form of syntax extension
      
      This commit adds syntax extension forms matching the types for procedural macros 2.0 (RFC #1566), these still require the usual syntax extension boiler plate, but this is a first step towards proper implementation and should be useful for macros 1.1 stuff too.
      
      Supports both attribute-like and function-like macros.
      
      Note that RFC #1566 has not been accepted yet, but I think there is consensus that we want to head in vaguely that direction and so this PR will be useful in any case. It is also fairly easy to undo and does not break any existing programs.
      
      This is related to #35957 in that I hope it can be used in the implementation of macros 1.1, however, there is no direct overlap and is more of a complement than a competing proposal. There is still a fair bit of work to do before the two can be combined.
      
      r? @jseyfried
      
      cc @alexcrichton, @cgswords, @EddyB, @aturon
      3a5d975f