OpenE2K/rust
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

fixed up issue-2185, but now it has a trait failure

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
John Clements 2013-04-18 16:48:33 -07:00
parent d6bb587c12
commit 178305ffec
1 changed files with 27 additions and 4 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

31
src/test/run-pass/issue-2185.rs
View File

@ -8,22 +8,45 @@
// option. This file may not be copied, modified, or distributed
// except according to those terms.
// xfail-test FIXME #2263
// does the second one subsume the first?
// xfail-test
// xfail-fast
// notes on this test case:
// On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 6:30 PM, John Clements <clements@brinckerhoff.org> wrote:
// the "issue-2185.rs" test was xfailed with a ref to #2263. Issue #2263 is now fixed, so I tried it again, and after adding some &self parameters, I got this error:
//
// Running /usr/local/bin/rustc:
// issue-2185.rs:24:0: 26:1 error: conflicting implementations for a trait
// issue-2185.rs:24 impl iterable<uint> for @fn(&fn(uint)) {
// issue-2185.rs:25 fn iter(&self, blk: &fn(v: uint)) { self( |i| blk(i) ) }
// issue-2185.rs:26 }
// issue-2185.rs:20:0: 22:1 note: note conflicting implementation here
// issue-2185.rs:20 impl<A> iterable<A> for @fn(&fn(A)) {
// issue-2185.rs:21 fn iter(&self, blk: &fn(A)) { self(blk); }
// issue-2185.rs:22 }
//
// … so it looks like it's just not possible to implement both the generic iterable<uint> and iterable<A> for the type iterable<uint>. Is it okay if I just remove this test?
//
// but Niko responded:
// think it's fine to remove this test, just because it's old and cruft and not hard to reproduce. *However* it should eventually be possible to implement the same interface for the same type multiple times with different type parameters, it's just that our current trait implementation has accidental limitations.
// so I'm leaving it in.
// This test had to do with an outdated version of the iterable trait.
// However, the condition it was testing seemed complex enough to
// warrant still having a test, so I inlined the old definitions.
trait iterable<A> {
fn iter(blk: &fn(A));
fn iter(&self, blk: &fn(A));
}
impl<A> iterable<A> for @fn(&fn(A)) {
fn iter(blk: &fn(A)) { self(blk); }
fn iter(&self, blk: &fn(A)) { self(blk); }
}
impl iterable<uint> for @fn(&fn(uint)) {
fn iter(blk: &fn(&&v: uint)) { self( |i| blk(i) ) }
fn iter(&self, blk: &fn(v: uint)) { self( |i| blk(i) ) }
}
fn filter<A,IA:iterable<A>>(self: IA, prd: @fn(A) -> bool, blk: &fn(A)) {