Totally not overkill

On today's issue of Totally Not Overkill: JITting a function in your test to tell you what failure to expect. Oh, stop looking at me like that. It was the easiest thing to do since I already have machinery to JIT Wide functions.

ExpectedFailure() { return { "OverloadResolutionFailure", 179, 183 }; }
using movable := cpp("CompileFail/CPPInterop/NonCopyable.h").test;
Main() {
    var := movable();
    copy := var;
    return false;
} 


Still, I turned up a BUNCH of bugs in those tests and a lot of missing coverage. For example, I have 30 possible semantic errors right now, and only 15 rejection tests (and several of those are missing member or overload resolution failures). I found some tests that hadn't been updated for the new function argument syntax. I found some tests that hadn't been updated for new integer literal rules. I found some tests that were never valid Wide in totally irrelevant ways. I found an error that gave the using context's location instead of the true location.

Next up I will begin classifying the compilation failure tests by which exception site they test, so I can identify less-tested call sites and exception types. There should be like, 40 compilation failure tests at least.

This is totally orthogonal to the fact that I want to completely overhaul error handling from analysis-terminating exceptions to per-node properties, and add tests for warnings to ensure that they also behave correctly.