Make XFAIL actually assert failure #455
Comments
tgross35
added a commit
to tgross35/rust-libm
that referenced
this issue
Jan 23, 2025
Currently our XFAILs are open ended; we do not check that it actually fails, so we have no easy way of knowing that a previously-failing test starts passing. Introduce a new enum that we return from overrides to give us more flexibility here, including the ability to assert that expected failures happen. This includes refactoring of `precision.rs` to be more accurate about where errors come from, if possible. Fixes: rust-lang#455
tgross35
added a commit
to tgross35/rust-libm
that referenced
this issue
Jan 23, 2025
Currently our XFAILs are open ended; we do not check that it actually fails, so we have no easy way of knowing that a previously-failing test starts passing. Introduce a new enum that we return from overrides to give us more flexibility here, including the ability to assert that expected failures happen. With the new enum, it is also possible to specify ULP via return value rather than passing a `&mut u32` parameter. This includes refactoring of `precision.rs` to be more accurate about where errors come from, if possible. Fixes: rust-lang#455
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Probably return a custom enum rather than
Option<TestResult>that says to assert success, assert failure, or skip.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: