macros: append generated test attribute so others are aware of it #6497
Conversation
This way other test macros can choose to not generate `#[::core::prelude::v1::test]` to avoid duplicated test runs. This commit also rejects existing `#[::core::prelude::v1::test]` just like how and why it rejects existing `#[test]`.
tokio-macros/Cargo.toml
Outdated
| @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ proc-macro = true | |||
| [dependencies] | |||
| proc-macro2 = "1.0.60" | |||
| quote = "1" | |||
| syn = { version = "2.0", features = ["full"] } | |||
| syn = { version = "2.0", features = ["full", "extra-traits"] } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What do you need this feature for? I prefer to avoid adding these features as they hurt compilation times.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
impl PartialEq for Attribute. I guess I could duplicate code. Let me figure out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see. if it is possible, then try to perform the equality check manually. Thanks!
| error: second test attribute is supplied, try to order it after `tokio::test` | ||
| --> $DIR/macros_invalid_input.rs:49:1 | ||
| | | ||
| 49 | #[::core::prelude::v1::test::test] | ||
| | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What? The #[tokio::test] macro is first, so what do you mean by "after"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I supposed this to be generated by other preceding test macros, e.g. #[test_log::test]. I guess I should reshape it or keep it origin. Any preference ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about "second test attribute is supplied, consider removing or ordering it after tokio::test" ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My challenge with the wording here is that the code that triggers this error has #[tokio::test] first, and then afterwards, it has a #[::core::prelude::v1::test]. So suggesting that you move #[::core::prelude::v1::test] after #[tokio::test] doesn't make since it's already after #[tokio::test]. Perhaps you could say "before" or "above" instead of "after"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know, it is strange. It should be something similar to following.
❯ grep -n -B 2 -A 2 "with_append_test_attribute_and_test_args_and_panic_async" tests/mod.rs
84-#[test_log::test]
85-#[tokio::test]
86:async fn with_append_test_attribute_and_test_args_and_panic_async(x: i8, _y: i8) {
87- assert_eq!(x, 0);
88-}
❯
❯ cargo test with_append_test_attribute_and_test_args_and_panic_async -- --nocapture
error: second test attribute is supplied, consider removing it or ordering it after `tokio::test`
--> tests/mod.rs:84:1
|
84 | #[test_log::test]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: this error originates in the attribute macro `test_log::test` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
error: could not compile `test-log` (test "mod") due to 2 previous errorsMoving it "before" or "above" will result in duplicated test runs.
I guess we could:
- Introduce dev dependency
test-log. This ways the words should be more intuitively. Is it worth ? - Use the short version "second test attribute is supplied".
- Other suggestions.
Hi @Darksonn, thank you for reviewing. I have updated this with a fixup commit targeting to your two concerns. Regarding the error words, I am open to any sentence, simply not good at 😮💨 .
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe just say "consider removing or changing the order of your test attributes".
…s are aware of it
…o others are aware of it
|
Hi @Darksonn, thank you for your reviewing, I have solved all review comments. Is there anything else left for this to move forward ? Should I do some squash/rebase work ? |
tokio-macros/src/entry.rs
Outdated
| syn::Meta::Path(path) => path, | ||
| _ => return false, | ||
| }; | ||
| let segments = ["core", "prelude", "v1", "test"]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's also available as a few other paths such as ::std::prelude::v1::test and ::core::prelude::rust_2021::test.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would this be too paranoid for us ?
Given that Rust has three editions since v1 and new coming in future, together with combinations from "std", "core" and leading colon, this is a pretty large list.
Given the fact that test is there since day one, I would recommend not doing this. I checked test macros listed below and none use variants other than the two. I don't think test macros should generate other variants, if they do, let them fix it to avoid duplicated test runs but not us.
- test-log, test-case, async-std::test, googletest::test uses
::core::prelude::v1::test. - quickcheck, test-strategy, rstest uses
#[test] proptest,tracing_test::traced_test does not generate any
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps we can match ::[std|core]::prelude::*:test?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated. Additionally, leading colons are optional now as review comments below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. If you can also add some of the variants to the tests, then I think this is ready to merge.
| #[tokio::test] | ||
| #[::core::prelude::v1::test] | ||
| async fn test_has_generated_second_test_attr() {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about core without the leading colons?
Motivation
Improve compatibility among multiple test proc macros.
Solution
#[::core::prelude::v1::test]to the end of test proc macros. This way, proc macros process later can choose to not generate#[::core::prelude::v1::test]to avoid duplicated test runs.#[::core::prelude::v1::test]to avoid duplicated test runs astokio::testis transforming an invalid test signature to one accepted by#[test]. This is consistent with what we currently treat#[test].Links