delta/go-git.git/test/syntax, branch dev.typeparams

test/syntax: remove interface.go

2021-04-06T18:55:39+00:00

The exact same test case covered by this file is also in
fixedbugs/bug121.go. No need for duplication.

Also, the actual syntax error tested (multiple method names
with a single signature) is an unlikely syntax error, and
only here for historical reasons (in the very beginning, this
was actually possible to write). Now, virtually nobody is making
this mistake.

Change-Id: I9d68e0aee2a63025f44e6338647f8250ecc3077a
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/307789
Trust: Robert Griesemer 
Run-TryBot: Robert Griesemer 
Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor

test: match gofrontend error messages

2020-12-02T02:56:41+00:00

The gofrontend code doesn't distinguish semicolon and newline,
and it doesn't have special treatment for EOF.

syntax/semi6.go:9:47: error: unexpected semicolon or newline in type declaration
syntax/semi6.go:11:62: error: unexpected semicolon or newline in type declaration

Change-Id: I9996b59a4fc78ad1935e779f354ddf75c0fb44e0
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/274692
Trust: Ian Lance Taylor 
Run-TryBot: Ian Lance Taylor 
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang 
TryBot-Result: Go Bot

test: update gofrontend expected errors

2020-11-30T20:15:10+00:00

This matches the error messages after CL 273890.

syntax/semi4.go:11:9: error: unexpected semicolon or newline, expecting ‘{’ after for clause
syntax/semi4.go:10:13: error: reference to undefined name ‘x’
syntax/semi4.go:12:17: error: reference to undefined name ‘z’

Change-Id: Ic88ff6e27d50bf70f5b2114383b84c42c0682f39
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/273891
Trust: Ian Lance Taylor 
Run-TryBot: Ian Lance Taylor 
TryBot-Result: Go Bot 
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang

test: match gofrontend error messages

2020-11-28T02:31:54+00:00

These changes match the following gofrontend error messages:

blank1.go:16:1: error: may not define methods on non-local type

chan/perm.go:28:9: error: expected channel
chan/perm.go:29:11: error: left operand of ‘<-’ must be channel
chan/perm.go:69:9: error: argument must be channel

complit1.go:25:16: error: attempt to slice object that is not array, slice, or string
complit1.go:26:16: error: attempt to slice object that is not array, slice, or string
complit1.go:27:17: error: attempt to slice object that is not array, slice, or string
complit1.go:49:41: error: may only omit types within composite literals of slice, array, or map type
complit1.go:50:14: error: expected struct, slice, array, or map type for composite literal

convlit.go:24:9: error: invalid type conversion (cannot use type unsafe.Pointer as type string)
convlit.go:25:9: error: invalid type conversion (cannot use type unsafe.Pointer as type float64)
convlit.go:26:9: error: invalid type conversion (cannot use type unsafe.Pointer as type int)

ddd1.go:63:9: error: invalid use of ‘...’ calling non-variadic function

fixedbugs/bug176.go:12:18: error: index expression is not integer constant

fixedbugs/bug332.go:17:10: error: use of undefined type ‘T’

fixedbugs/issue4232.go:22:16: error: integer constant overflow
fixedbugs/issue4232.go:33:16: error: integer constant overflow
fixedbugs/issue4232.go:44:25: error: integer constant overflow
fixedbugs/issue4232.go:55:16: error: integer constant overflow

fixedbugs/issue4458.go:19:14: error: type has no method ‘foo’

fixedbugs/issue5172.go:24:14: error: too many expressions for struct

init.go:17:9: error: reference to undefined name ‘runtime’

initializerr.go:26:29: error: duplicate value for index 1

interface/explicit.go:60:14: error: type assertion only valid for interface types

label.go:64:9: error: reference to undefined label ‘go2’

label1.go:18:97: error: continue statement not within for
label1.go:22:97: error: continue statement not within for
label1.go:106:89: error: continue statement not within for
label1.go:108:26: error: invalid continue label ‘on’
label1.go:111:118: error: break statement not within for or switch or select
label1.go:113:23: error: invalid break label ‘dance’

map1.go:64:9: error: not enough arguments
map1.go:65:9: error: not enough arguments
map1.go:67:9: error: argument 1 must be a map

method2.go:36:11: error: reference to undefined field or method ‘val’
method2.go:37:11: error: reference to undefined field or method ‘val’
method2.go:41:12: error: method requires pointer (use ‘(*T).g’)

syntax/chan1.go:13:19: error: send statement used as value; use select for non-blocking send
syntax/chan1.go:17:11: error: send statement used as value; use select for non-blocking send

Change-Id: I98047b60a376e3d2788836300f7fcac3f2c285cb
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/273527
Trust: Ian Lance Taylor 
Run-TryBot: Ian Lance Taylor 
TryBot-Result: Go Bot 
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang

cmd/compile/internal/syntax: better error when an assignment is used in value context

2020-02-21T22:57:52+00:00

The error message is now positioned at the statement position (which is
an identifing token, such as the '=' for assignments); and in case of
assignments it emphasizes the assignment by putting the Lhs and Rhs
in parentheses. Finally, the wording is changed from "use of * as value"
to the stronger "cannot use * as value" (for which there is precedent
elsewhere in the parser).

Fixes #36858.

Change-Id: Ic3f101bba50f58e3a1d9b29645066634631f2d61
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/218337
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky

cmd/compile: better handling of incorrect type switches

2018-04-03T05:34:20+00:00

Don't report errors if we don't have a correct type switch
guard; instead ignore it and leave it to the type-checker
to report the error. This leads to better error messages
concentrating on the type switch guard rather than errors
around (confusing) syntactic details.

Also clean up some code setting up AssertExpr (they never
have a nil Type field) and remove some incorrect TODOs.

Fixes #24470.

Change-Id: I69512f36e0417e3b5ea9c8856768e04b19d654a8
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/103615
Run-TryBot: Robert Griesemer 
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot 
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky

cmd/compile/internal/parser: improved a couple of error messages

2017-02-24T18:54:36+00:00

The new syntax tree introduced with 1.8 represents send statements
(ch <- x) as statements; the old syntax tree represented them as
expressions (and parsed them as such) but complained if they were
used in expression context. As a consequence, some of the errors
that in the past were of the form "ch <- x used as value" now look
like "unexpected <- ..." because a "<-" is not valid according to
Go syntax in those situations. Accept the new error message.

Also: Fine-tune handling of misformed for loop headers.

Also: Minor cleanups/better comments.

Fixes #17590.

Change-Id: Ia541dea1f2f015c1b21f5b3ae44aacdec60a8aba
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/37386
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky

cmd/compile/internal/syntax: generalize error about var decls in init clauses

2017-02-13T23:15:32+00:00

Change-Id: I62f9748b97bec245338ebf9686fbf6ad6dc6a9c2
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36931
Run-TryBot: Robert Griesemer 
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky

cmd/compile/internal/parser: improved syntax error for incorrect if/for/switch header

2017-02-09T03:54:47+00:00

Starting the error message with "expecting" rather than "missing"
causes the syntax error mechanism to add additional helpful info
(it recognizes "expecting" but not "missing").

Fixes #17328.

Change-Id: I8482ca5e5a6a6b22e0ed0d831b7328e264156334
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36637
Run-TryBot: Robert Griesemer 
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky 
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot

cmd/compile/internal/syntax: differentiate between ';' and '\n' in syntax errors

2017-02-09T01:45:17+00:00

Towards better syntax error messages: With this change, the parser knows whether
a semicolon was an actual ';' in the source, or whether it was an automatically
inserted semicolon as result of a '\n' or EOF. Using this information in error
messages makes them more understandable.

For #17328.

Change-Id: I8cd9accee8681b62569d0ecef922d38682b401eb
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/36636
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky