Use FileCheck's `[[@LINE+n]]` mechanism to refer to the next line.
This is made awkward by a couple of things:
* We want to keep the `CHECK` lines in the original order.
* Errors are sometimes more than one line long.
The approach we use is to interleave the original lines and the check lines, putting each check line as early as possible subject to two rules:
1) Check lines never precede the 'AUTOUPDATE' line
2) Except when required by rule (1), a check line that refers to a source line by line number is never placed earlier than a source line that precedes that source line.
The actual `[[@LINE+n]]` annotations are created in a second pass after we've interleaved the lines so that we can work out the correct offsets.
Co-authored-by: Jon Meow <jperkins@google.com>
Breaks `--trace` into two flags:
- `--parser_debug`, which sets the parser debug level (which I haven't dug into piping with `--trace`, but seemed likely to be troublesome)
- `--trace_file`, which now the type checker and interpreter will use for trace information (note compile errors should use a different channel)
Most of the file edits are just mechanical testdata flag updates: `sed -i 's/--trace/--parser_debug --trace_file=-/' testdata/**/*.carbon`
To explain the output paths:
- parse/compile errors: stderr
- print() calls: stdout
- parser tracing: `--parser_debug` option, stdout (formerly stdout if `--trace`)
- type check/compile tracing: `--trace_file=<file>`, giving `-` uses stdout (formerly stdout if `--trace`)
- return code of executed Carbon code: `--trace_file` if set, stdout if not (formerly stdout always)
This implements #826, I think covering everything important there.
Regarding ReturnTypeContext, I broke that out because it started feeling like a significant number of args to be passing around, and I think this makes the association inside type checking clearer.
Co-authored-by: Geoff Romer <gromer@google.com>
There's a small update to update_checks.py to handle the recursive directories. Also, I'm only using one level of nesting in this PR but really no reason we can't do more. I'm just not sure what clustering is best right now.
As a pattern, I'm trying to name all failing tests `fail_*.carbon`.