Skip to content

Conversation

stmontgomery
Copy link
Contributor

WIP

Motivation:

[Explain here the context, and why you're making that change. What is the problem you're trying to solve.]

Modifications:

[Describe the modifications you've done.]

Checklist:

  • Code and documentation should follow the style of the Style Guide.
  • If public symbols are renamed or modified, DocC references should be updated.

rdar://147356925

@stmontgomery stmontgomery added this to the Swift 6.x milestone May 27, 2025
@stmontgomery stmontgomery self-assigned this May 27, 2025
@stmontgomery stmontgomery added bug 🪲 Something isn't working tools integration 🛠️ Integration of swift-testing into tools/IDEs discovery 🔎 test content discovery labels May 27, 2025
/// property on the ID of the containing suite will be the name of the
/// imported module, but the value of this property for the ID of the test
/// within that extension will be the name of the module which declares the
/// extension.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Danger! This is potentially ambiguous. We may want to instead describe such a test in terms of both modules.

@@ -123,6 +131,8 @@ extension Test: Identifiable {
var result = containingTypeInfo.map(ID.init)
?? ID(moduleName: sourceLocation.moduleName, nameComponents: [], sourceLocation: nil)

result.moduleName = sourceLocation.moduleName
Copy link
Contributor

@grynspan grynspan May 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How about we store this value in a separate field (if it differs from the inferred module)? extensionModuleName: String? perhaps.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug 🪲 Something isn't working discovery 🔎 test content discovery tools integration 🛠️ Integration of swift-testing into tools/IDEs
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants