Add regression test for $-prefixed fragment specifier in repetition#159114
Merged
Conversation
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Collaborator
|
r? @TaKO8Ki rustbot has assigned @TaKO8Ki. Use Why was this reviewer chosen?The reviewer was selected based on:
|
Member
|
Thanks! |
Contributor
rust-bors
Bot
added
S-waiting-on-bors
JonathanBrouwer
added a commit
to JonathanBrouwer/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 11, 2026
… r=chenyukang Add regression test for $-prefixed fragment specifier in repetition Fixes rust-lang#157157. The diagnostic was fixed in rust-lang#155643, but the existing test only covers an accidental `$` before a fragment specifier at the top level of a matcher. This adds the equivalent case inside a repetition. The new case reuses `$test:$tt` from the adjacent test so that repetition nesting is the only difference between the two cases. Tested with: - `./x test tests/ui/macros/macro-missing-fragment.rs` This is my first contribution to this repository, so please let me know if I have missed any conventions or required steps or should make any additional changes.
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 11, 2026
…uwer Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #159126 (Fix PR number in bootstrap's change tracker) - #156968 (diagnostics: suggest generic_const_args for const ops) - #159012 (Shrink mir::Statement to 40 bytes) - #158182 (std: use `OnceLock` for SGX argument storage) - #159114 (Add regression test for $-prefixed fragment specifier in repetition) - #159060 (Look for the cdb architecture that corresponds to the target triple) - #159089 (riscv: update c-variadic test for LLVM changes) - #159093 (pretty-print: use inline asm's actual macro name)
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 11, 2026
…uwer Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #159126 (Fix PR number in bootstrap's change tracker) - #156968 (diagnostics: suggest generic_const_args for const ops) - #159012 (Shrink mir::Statement to 40 bytes) - #158182 (std: use `OnceLock` for SGX argument storage) - #159114 (Add regression test for $-prefixed fragment specifier in repetition) - #159060 (Look for the cdb architecture that corresponds to the target triple) - #159089 (riscv: update c-variadic test for LLVM changes) - #159093 (pretty-print: use inline asm's actual macro name)
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 11, 2026
…uwer Rollup of 14 pull requests Successful merges: - #159126 (Fix PR number in bootstrap's change tracker) - #155811 (Include AtomicU128/AtomicI128 in docs for any target) - #156968 (diagnostics: suggest generic_const_args for const ops) - #159012 (Shrink mir::Statement to 40 bytes) - #156618 (rustdoc: test ignoring rustc lints in CLI) - #158182 (std: use `OnceLock` for SGX argument storage) - #159114 (Add regression test for $-prefixed fragment specifier in repetition) - #158523 (Fix feature gate for `repr(simd)`) - #158876 (Fix multiple logic bugs in `Arc::make_mut`) - #158928 (std: fix Xous UDP send_to length mismatch and truncation) - #159060 (Look for the cdb architecture that corresponds to the target triple) - #159089 (riscv: update c-variadic test for LLVM changes) - #159093 (pretty-print: use inline asm's actual macro name) - #159122 (doc: use ptr::addr in offset_from docs) Failed merges: - #158732 (Apply MCP 1003 and move diagnostics.rs into its own module)
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 11, 2026
Rollup merge of #159114 - asuto15:macro-fragment-regression, r=chenyukang Add regression test for $-prefixed fragment specifier in repetition Fixes #157157. The diagnostic was fixed in #155643, but the existing test only covers an accidental `$` before a fragment specifier at the top level of a matcher. This adds the equivalent case inside a repetition. The new case reuses `$test:$tt` from the adjacent test so that repetition nesting is the only difference between the two cases. Tested with: - `./x test tests/ui/macros/macro-missing-fragment.rs` This is my first contribution to this repository, so please let me know if I have missed any conventions or required steps or should make any additional changes.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #157157.
The diagnostic was fixed in #155643, but the existing test only covers an accidental
$before a fragment specifier at the top level of a matcher.This adds the equivalent case inside a repetition.
The new case reuses
$test:$ttfrom the adjacent test so that repetition nesting is the only difference between the two cases.Tested with:
./x test tests/ui/macros/macro-missing-fragment.rsThis is my first contribution to this repository, so please let me know if I have missed any conventions or required steps or should make any additional changes.