Moved all VecDeque tests from libcollections to libcollectionstest

[KiChjang]

Encountered while I was trying to work on #28518. Please let me know whether this is a correct move.

[rust-highfive]

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @nikomatsakis (or someone else) soon.

If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

[bluss]

I found the travis error, search the log for "duplicate definition of value test_drain"

[KiChjang]

Oh, which test should we use for test_drain in that case? There are two tests and I don't know which of them is superior.

[bluss]

Save both. One is testing drain(..) and the other is testing with different ranges.

[bluss]

Why do we move these? I don't really know why we have two crates.

[KiChjang]

@gankro said this on IRC:

<Gankro> KiChjang: used to be everything was in libcollections, but libcollectionstest has to pull some stuff out when libcollections gained some langitemss

[bluss]

Ok good

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit ec9c78e has been approved by bluss

[bluss]

@bors r-

[KiChjang]

test num::tests::test_i32f64 ... ok

test num::tests::test_i32i64 ... ok

<test>:1:62: 1:63 error: macro undefined: 'z!'

<test>:1 fn bogus() {macro_rules! z (() => (3+4));}fn inty() -> i32 { z!() }

                                                                      ^

<test>:1:62: 1:63 help: did you mean `z!`?

error: aborting due to previous error

test ext::expand::tests::macros_cant_escape_fns_test ... ok

test ext::expand::tests::method_arg_hygiene ... ok

test num::tests::test_i8f64 ... ok

test num::tests::test_i8f32 ... ok

test ext::expand::tests::method_arg_hygiene_2 ... ok

<test>:1:59: 1:60 error: macro undefined: 'z!'

<test>:1 mod foo {macro_rules! z (() => (3+4));}fn inty() -> i32 { z!() }

                                                                   ^

<test>:1:59: 1:60 help: did you mean `z!`?

error: aborting due to previous error

test ext::expand::tests::macros_cant_escape_mods_test ... ok

Did I do anything wrong that caused this output?

[bluss]

In a run-pass test, you need a main function and just call this test function manually. We don't use #[test] here.

[bluss]

@bors r+

Thanks! Notice that there is no notification for new pushes to a PR. You need to put a message here to notify us who are subscribing.

[bors]

📌 Commit 706e9f5 has been approved by bluss

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 706e9f5 with merge a09a604...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - auto-linux-32-nopt-t, auto-linux-32-opt, auto-linux-64-debug-opt, auto-linux-64-nopt-t, auto-linux-64-opt, auto-linux-64-x-android-t, auto-linux-cross-opt, auto-linux-musl-64-opt, auto-mac-32-opt, auto-mac-64-nopt-t, auto-mac-64-opt, auto-win-gnu-32-nopt-t, auto-win-gnu-32-opt, auto-win-gnu-64-nopt-t, auto-win-gnu-64-opt, auto-win-msvc-32-opt, auto-win-msvc-64-opt