2012-02-16 21:49:30 -07:00
|
|
|
// errorcheck
|
2009-12-15 17:22:04 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2016-04-10 15:32:26 -06:00
|
|
|
// Copyright 2009 The Go Authors. All rights reserved.
|
2009-12-15 17:22:04 -07:00
|
|
|
// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style
|
|
|
|
// license that can be found in the LICENSE file.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
package main
|
|
|
|
|
test: re-enable most go/tests that were disabled because of types2 differences
I made the default be that, where there are differences between types2
and -G=0 error messages, we want errorcheck tests to pass types2.
Typically, we can get errorcheck to pass on types2 and -G=0 if they give
the same number of error messages on the same lines, just different
wording. If they give a different number of error messages, then I made
types2 pass. I added an exception list for -G=0 to cover those cases
where -G=0 and types give different numbers of error messages.
Because types2 does not run if there are syntax errors, for several
tests, I had to split the tests into two parts in order to get all the
indicated errors to be reported in types2 (bug228.go, bug388.go,
issue11610.go, issue14520.go)
I tried to preserve the GCCGO labeling correctly (but may have gotten
some wrong). When types2 now matches where a GCCGO error previously
occurred, I transformed GCCGO_ERROR -> ERROR. When types2 no longer
reports an error in a certain place, I transformed ERROR -> GCCGO_ERROR.
When types2 reports an error in a new place, I used GC_ERROR.
The remaining entries in types2Failures are things that I think we
probably still need to fix - either actually missing errors in types2,
or cases where types2 gives worse errors than -G=0.
Change-Id: I7f01e82b322b16094096b67d7ed2bb39b410c34f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/372854
Trust: Dan Scales <danscales@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@google.com>
2021-12-03 17:10:10 -07:00
|
|
|
type I interface{ m() }
|
|
|
|
type T struct{ m func() }
|
|
|
|
type M struct{}
|
|
|
|
|
2009-12-15 17:22:04 -07:00
|
|
|
func (M) m() {}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
func main() {
|
|
|
|
var t T
|
|
|
|
var m M
|
|
|
|
var i I
|
test: re-enable most go/tests that were disabled because of types2 differences
I made the default be that, where there are differences between types2
and -G=0 error messages, we want errorcheck tests to pass types2.
Typically, we can get errorcheck to pass on types2 and -G=0 if they give
the same number of error messages on the same lines, just different
wording. If they give a different number of error messages, then I made
types2 pass. I added an exception list for -G=0 to cover those cases
where -G=0 and types give different numbers of error messages.
Because types2 does not run if there are syntax errors, for several
tests, I had to split the tests into two parts in order to get all the
indicated errors to be reported in types2 (bug228.go, bug388.go,
issue11610.go, issue14520.go)
I tried to preserve the GCCGO labeling correctly (but may have gotten
some wrong). When types2 now matches where a GCCGO error previously
occurred, I transformed GCCGO_ERROR -> ERROR. When types2 no longer
reports an error in a certain place, I transformed ERROR -> GCCGO_ERROR.
When types2 reports an error in a new place, I used GC_ERROR.
The remaining entries in types2Failures are things that I think we
probably still need to fix - either actually missing errors in types2,
or cases where types2 gives worse errors than -G=0.
Change-Id: I7f01e82b322b16094096b67d7ed2bb39b410c34f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/372854
Trust: Dan Scales <danscales@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@google.com>
2021-12-03 17:10:10 -07:00
|
|
|
|
2009-12-15 17:22:04 -07:00
|
|
|
i = m
|
test: re-enable most go/tests that were disabled because of types2 differences
I made the default be that, where there are differences between types2
and -G=0 error messages, we want errorcheck tests to pass types2.
Typically, we can get errorcheck to pass on types2 and -G=0 if they give
the same number of error messages on the same lines, just different
wording. If they give a different number of error messages, then I made
types2 pass. I added an exception list for -G=0 to cover those cases
where -G=0 and types give different numbers of error messages.
Because types2 does not run if there are syntax errors, for several
tests, I had to split the tests into two parts in order to get all the
indicated errors to be reported in types2 (bug228.go, bug388.go,
issue11610.go, issue14520.go)
I tried to preserve the GCCGO labeling correctly (but may have gotten
some wrong). When types2 now matches where a GCCGO error previously
occurred, I transformed GCCGO_ERROR -> ERROR. When types2 no longer
reports an error in a certain place, I transformed ERROR -> GCCGO_ERROR.
When types2 reports an error in a new place, I used GC_ERROR.
The remaining entries in types2Failures are things that I think we
probably still need to fix - either actually missing errors in types2,
or cases where types2 gives worse errors than -G=0.
Change-Id: I7f01e82b322b16094096b67d7ed2bb39b410c34f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/372854
Trust: Dan Scales <danscales@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@google.com>
2021-12-03 17:10:10 -07:00
|
|
|
// types2 does not give extra error "T.m is a field, not a method"
|
|
|
|
i = t // ERROR "not a method|has no methods|does not implement I"
|
2009-12-15 17:22:04 -07:00
|
|
|
_ = i
|
|
|
|
}
|