Dealing with old executables that are left over after a rename

[grothesque]

In my test, I have

use assert_cmd::cargo::CommandCargoExt as _;
use std::process::Command;

and then later

let mut cmd = Command::cargo_bin("old_name")?
    .args(args)
    .stdout(Stdio::piped())
    .spawn()?;

The tests are passing. The only problem is, that “old_name” no longer corresponds to the name of the executable that is being built! I had changed that name in “Cargo.toml”, but forgot to update the test. assert_cmd is not complaining, it happily runs the old file left over from old builds.

Is there something that I missed that would have helped to avoid this pitfall? If not, perhaps some way can be found to detect this?

[epage]

I'd recommend using cargo_bin! (added in #234). In fact, I had thought I had deprecated the function version but apparently not.

[grothesque]

Deprecating sounds like a good idea!

But even more important would be updating the main example. Currently it recommends using the function:

use assert_cmd::prelude::*;

use std::process::Command;

let mut cmd = Command::cargo_bin(env!("CARGO_PKG_NAME"))
    .unwrap();
let output = cmd.unwrap();

(I was just following that example in my test...)

I also find the example given on the page of the cargo_bin! macro confusing: it refers to trycmd::cargo_bin!, but trycmd is a different crate. How to use assert_cmd::cargo::cargo_bin!?

[epage]

The challenge with the example is that the macro would be a compiler error

[epage]

I've gone ahead and deprecated in #248. I left most docs the same because they wouldn't compile otherwise.