Update tests to match new implementation #36
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Sorry, having some serious git skill issues right now. Will push a new version soon. |
|
Now it's fixed and rebased on the latest branch @leostera |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi! I had a look at the test failures and they seemed to be mostly just formatting differences and nothing implementation related so I went ahead and promoted the changes.
Two stylistic changes were responsible for the bulk of the changes:
fun x -> fun y -> x + ybecamefun x y -> x + yResultandOptionwere specified asStdlib.ResultandStdlib.OptionOne strange thing: the tests were throwing errors that
[@@@warning "-37"]wasn't allowed to appear at that location. I'm not sure this is true, but removing it resolved those errors and didn't introduce any new errors.There were some regressions in the compiler regarding top-level placement of attributes: ocaml/ocaml#13170 but I couldn't tell if they were already implemented in 5.2. In any case, should those errors re-appear in a new release we can just add back those attributes. (Or maybe put it in a
dunefile? See https://stackoverflow.com/a/57120928/16727853)I'm not familiar with serde's codebase so I hope I didn't miss anything, but I think most changes were pretty straightforward.