Use edition ranges in tests/ui (Batch 1)

[pvdrz]

r? @fmease

[rustbot]

fmease is not on the review rotation at the moment.
They may take a while to respond.

[pvdrz]

I'm trying to do this in smaller batches for ease of review and to diminish the chance of the PR becoming stale

[fmease]

I've only reviewed the 1st commit so far but I'll post the review comments I wrote a few days ago. I hope to get to the other commits / finish my review in the next days, they look much smaller anyway.

View changes since this review

[fmease]

The stderr files for edition2015 and edition2018 are identical as far as I can tell, for which reason did you split them instead of keeping them combined as 2015..2021?

[fmease]

Strictly speaking, 2021.. isn't "edition2021". I think I'd prefer a different name for that revision, edition2021up or edition2021onwards, idk.

[fmease]

I find it quite unfortunate and a bit unreasonable that we have to basically duplicate a huge stderr file for a single label change (unexpected argument #2 → unexpected argument #2 of type `!`). Hmm, however splitting out that test cases probably doesn't make sense either due to the large test setup. I don't know what's the call here..

[apiraino]

rust-lang/compiler-team#861 was a long discussion and my memory is fuzzy, at a cursory read I can't pinpoint where it was agreed to duplicate stderr files

[rust-bors]

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #152785) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[apiraino]

For context, I think this PR implements the proposal in rust-lang/compiler-team#861

(am I correct @pvdrz?)

[apiraino]

Given the last comment, it seems that are open questions. Switching to waiting on author to incorporate changes. Feel free to request a review with @rustbot ready, thanks!

@rustbot author

[rustbot]

Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use @rustbot ready.