rust/src/test/ui/refutable-pattern-errors.rs

fn func((1, (Some(1), 2..=3)): (isize, (Option<isize>, isize))) { }
//~^ ERROR refutable pattern in function argument: `(_, _)` not covered

fn main() {
    let (1, (Some(1), 2..=3)) = (1, (None, 2));
    //~^ ERROR refutable pattern in local binding: `(std::i32::MIN..=0i32, _)` not covered
}
migrate codebase to `..=` inclusive range patterns These were stabilized in March 2018's #47813, and are the Preferred Way to Do It going forward (q.v. #51043). 2018-05-28 19:42:11 -07:00			`fn func((1, (Some(1), 2..=3)): (isize, (Option<isize>, isize))) { }`
Address review comments 2014-06-19 20:55:12 +02:00			//~^ ERROR refutable pattern in function argument: `(_, _)` not covered
Check pattern refutability the same way exhaustiveness is checked 2014-05-31 15:13:46 +02:00
			`fn main() {`
migrate codebase to `..=` inclusive range patterns These were stabilized in March 2018's #47813, and are the Preferred Way to Do It going forward (q.v. #51043). 2018-05-28 19:42:11 -07:00			`let (1, (Some(1), 2..=3)) = (1, (None, 2));`
pretty-pretty extremal constants! While many programmers may intuitively appreciate the significance of "magic numbers" like −2147483648, Rust is about empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software! It's a bit more legible to print the constant names (even noisy fully-qualified-paths thereof). The bit-manipulation methods mirror those in `librustc_mir::hair::pattern::_match::all_constructors`; thanks to the immortal Varkor for guidance. Resolves #56393. 2019-07-06 19:41:12 -07:00			//~^ ERROR refutable pattern in local binding: `(std::i32::MIN..=0i32, _)` not covered
Check pattern refutability the same way exhaustiveness is checked 2014-05-31 15:13:46 +02:00			`}`