Fix for test 'repl\i5218' on Windows

[michelou]

Output prior to change is:

[info] Test run started
[info] Test dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.replTests started
expected =========>
scala> val tuple = (1, "2", 3L)
val tuple: (Int, String, Long) = (1,2,3)
scala> 0.0 *: tuple
val res0: Double *: (Int, String, Long)(tuple) = (0.0,1,2,3)
scala> tuple ++ tuple
val res1: Int *: String *: Long *:
  scala.Tuple.Concat[Unit, (Int, String, Long)(tuple)] = (1,2,3,1,2,3)
actual ===========>
scala> val tuple = (1, "2", 3L)
val tuple: (Int, String, Long) = (1,2,3)
scala> 0.0 *: tuple
val res0: Double *: (Int, String, Long)(tuple) = (0.0,1,2,3)
scala> tuple ++ tuple
val res1: Int *: String *: Long *:
  scala.Tuple.Concat[Unit, (Int, String, Long)(tuple)] = (1,2,3,1,2,3)
[error] Test dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.replTests failed: java.lang.AssertionError: Error in file W:\dotty-replTests\compiler\target\scala-2.12\test-classes\repl\i5218, expected output did not match actual, took 2.024 sec
[error]     at dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.testFile(ScriptedTests.scala:87)
[error]     at dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.$anonfun$replTests$1(ScriptedTests.scala:91)
[error]     at dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.$anonfun$replTests$1$adapted(ScriptedTests.scala:91)
[error]     at scala.collection.IndexedSeqOptimized.foreach(IndexedSeqOptimized.scala:36)
[error]     at scala.collection.IndexedSeqOptimized.foreach$(IndexedSeqOptimized.scala:33)
[error]     at scala.collection.mutable.ArrayOps$ofRef.foreach(ArrayOps.scala:198)
[error]     at dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.replTests(ScriptedTests.scala:91)
[error]     ...
[info] Test dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.typePrinterTests started
[info] Test run finished: 1 failed, 0 ignored, 2 total, 3.158s

With the addition of method printOutput in file test\dotty\tools\repl\ScriptedTests.scala we can see the issue with repl\i5218 on Windows (missing carriage return character on the second-last line):

[info] Test run started
[info] Test dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.replTests started
expected (#chars=287, #CR=6, #LF=6) ========>
scala> val tuple = (1, "2", 3L)<CR><LF>
val tuple: (Int, String, Long) = (1,2,3)<CR><LF>
scala> 0.0 *: tuple<CR><LF>
val res0: Double *: (Int, String, Long)(tuple) = (0.0,1,2,3)<CR><LF>
scala> tuple ++ tuple<CR><LF>
val res1: Int *: String *: Long *:<CR><LF>
  scala.Tuple.Concat[Unit, (Int, String, Long)(tuple)] = (1,2,3,1,2,3)
actual (#chars=286, #CR=5, #LF=6) ========>
scala> val tuple = (1, "2", 3L)<CR><LF>
val tuple: (Int, String, Long) = (1,2,3)<CR><LF>
scala> 0.0 *: tuple<CR><LF>
val res0: Double *: (Int, String, Long)(tuple) = (0.0,1,2,3)<CR><LF>
scala> tuple ++ tuple<CR><LF>
val res1: Int *: String *: Long *:<LF>
  scala.Tuple.Concat[Unit, (Int, String, Long)(tuple)] = (1,2,3,1,2,3)
[error] Test dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.replTests failed: java.lang.AssertionError: Error in file W:\dotty-replTests\compiler\target\scala-2.12\test-classes\repl\i5218, expected output did not match actual, took 2.1 sec
[error]     at dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.testFile(ScriptedTests.scala:94)
[error]     at dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.$anonfun$replTests$1(ScriptedTests.scala:98)
[error]     at dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.$anonfun$replTests$1$adapted(ScriptedTests.scala:98)
[error]     at scala.collection.IndexedSeqOptimized.foreach(IndexedSeqOptimized.scala:36)
[error]     at scala.collection.IndexedSeqOptimized.foreach$(IndexedSeqOptimized.scala:33)
[error]     at scala.collection.mutable.ArrayOps$ofRef.foreach(ArrayOps.scala:198)
[error]     at dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.replTests(ScriptedTests.scala:98)
[error]     ...
[info] Test dotty.tools.repl.ScriptedTests.typePrinterTests started
[info] Test run finished: 1 failed, 0 ignored, 2 total, 3.305s

In summary :

• The fix is located in file src\dotty\tools\dotc\printing\Texts.scala
• Method printOutput in file test\dotty\tools\repl\ScriptedTests.scala allows us to detect the issue with repl\i5218
• Change in file test\dotty\tools\vulpix\RunnerOrchestration.scala is a small code improvement (not related to the issue).

[dottybot]

Hello, and thank you for opening this PR! 🎉

All contributors have signed the CLA, thank you! ❤️

Have an awesome day! ☀️

[smarter]

Otherwise LGTM.

[smarter]

I would rather not have these replacements done in the printed output, it makes it harder to fix a broken test by copy-pasting the console output in a file.

[allanrenucci]

LGTM. Thanks @michelou