Skip to content

Remove tests that fail with Swift 3 expression type checking support … #197

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

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Remove tests that fail with Swift 3 expression type checking support … #197

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

rudkx
Copy link
Contributor

@rudkx rudkx commented Jul 3, 2018

…removed.

Most of these are tested with 4.x as well, and remain. I've wholesale
deleted the ones that are only tested with 3.x, but could revert those
parts of XFAIL them instead if there is a reason to do so. My thoughts
are that it's easy to replace these when we get hashes to text 4.x with.

…removed.

Most of these are tested with 4.x as well, and remain. I've wholesale
deleted the ones that are only tested with 3.x, but could revert those
parts of XFAIL them instead if there is a reason to do so. My thoughts
are that it's easy to replace these when we get hashes to text 4.x with.
@rudkx
Copy link
Contributor Author

rudkx commented Jul 3, 2018

@swift-ci Please test

@rudkx rudkx requested a review from clackary July 3, 2018 23:19
Copy link
Contributor

@clackary clackary left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Go ahead and remove 3.x hashes where a 4.x hash already exists, but we should wait to remove entire projects. Some of these existing hashes might still work when building with 4.2. It's worth at least trying before removing it entirely.

@rudkx
Copy link
Contributor Author

rudkx commented Jul 4, 2018

@clackary I can certainly XFAIL these instead, but they are definitely not going to build with 4.2 with the current hashes (they all fail due to Swift 3-specific changes being removed in swiftlang/swift#17691).

Note that SwifterSwift has two complete entries here, and I've deleted just the one that was testing 3.0.

@rudkx
Copy link
Contributor Author

rudkx commented Jul 4, 2018

@clackary Let me know if you think it's worth XFAILing. If I do that I will need one or more JIRAs to reference for the tests that are XFAILed.

@clackary
Copy link
Contributor

clackary commented Jul 4, 2018

@rudkx I think it is worth XFAILing. I think there's an expectation to at least notify maintainers and give them a chance to update it before their project is removed.

moment to disable the ones that do not build with expression type
checking support for Swift 3 removed.
@rudkx
Copy link
Contributor Author

rudkx commented Jul 4, 2018

@clackary Okay, updated to XFAIL instead (except for the project that had two entries, where I've now removed the 3.0 one).

@rudkx
Copy link
Contributor Author

rudkx commented Jul 4, 2018

@swift-ci Please test

Copy link
Contributor

@clackary clackary left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Thanks, @rudkx

@rudkx
Copy link
Contributor Author

rudkx commented Jul 4, 2018

@swift-ci Please test

@rudkx
Copy link
Contributor Author

rudkx commented Jul 4, 2018

The failures are all UPASSes for the tests that have been XFAILed but which do not fail without my compiler PR (swiftlang/swift#17691).

@rudkx
Copy link
Contributor Author

rudkx commented Jul 5, 2018

Please test with following pull request:
swiftlang/swift#17691

@swift-ci Please test

@rudkx
Copy link
Contributor Author

rudkx commented Jul 10, 2018

Most of these were covered by #210 and other PRs. I'll open a new PR for anything else that is still blocking my compiler PR.

@rudkx rudkx closed this Jul 10, 2018
@rudkx rudkx deleted the remove-swift-3-tests-that-fail-with-typechecker-changes branch July 13, 2018 23:05
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants