Skip to content
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

Style guidelines: Change name of unit test sub-module to "tests". #24783

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 25, 2015

Conversation

jooert
Copy link
Contributor

@jooert jooert commented Apr 24, 2015

Changes the style guidelines regarding unit tests to recommend using a sub-module named "tests" instead of "test" for unit tests as "test" might clash with imports of libtest (see #23870, #24030 and http://users.rust-lang.org/t/guidelines-naming-of-unit-test-module/1078 for previous discussions).

r? @alexcrichton

Changes the style guidelines regarding unit tests to recommend using a
sub-module named "tests" instead of "test" for unit tests as "test"
might clash with imports of libtest.
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @alexcrichton (or someone else) soon.

If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. The way Github handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes.

Please see CONTRIBUTING.md for more information.

@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

Doc stuff is good, but I'm not sure if we want to actually change the whole standard library over. but maybe? Let's see what others think.

(Oh, and thanks for the PR!)

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: r+ 07cc7d9

I'm ok with changing over the stdlib, there's some good support and consensus behind tests vs test and it's also a relatively small change.

@liigo
Copy link
Contributor

liigo commented Apr 25, 2015

Nice!

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2015
Changes the style guidelines regarding unit tests to recommend using a sub-module named "tests" instead of "test" for unit tests as "test" might clash with imports of libtest (see #23870, #24030 and http://users.rust-lang.org/t/guidelines-naming-of-unit-test-module/1078 for previous discussions).

r? @alexcrichton
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 25, 2015

⌛ Testing commit 07cc7d9 with merge e3d00a4...

@bors bors merged commit 07cc7d9 into rust-lang:master Apr 25, 2015
@jooert jooert deleted the unittestguidelines branch April 25, 2015 15:22
@steveklabnik
Copy link
Member

marking for docs backport, but just the style chunk. TRPL will get its own backport.

steveklabnik added a commit to steveklabnik/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2015
Only backporting the style portion, as changing the test suite is needless churn, and the book/reference are getting their own imports at the end.
@steveklabnik steveklabnik mentioned this pull request Apr 25, 2015
jooert added a commit to jooert/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 29, 2015
Since rust-lang#24783, the style guidelines recommend that unit tests should live in a submodule `tests` rather than `test` to not clash with the possible use of libtest. This is especially important for benchmark tests as they require libtest. Fixes rust-lang#24923.
alexcrichton added a commit to alexcrichton/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 29, 2015
Since rust-lang#24783, the style guidelines recommend that unit tests should live in a submodule `tests` rather than `test` to not clash with the possible use of libtest. This is especially important for benchmark tests as they require libtest. Fixes rust-lang#24923.
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.

6 participants