test runner tasks could take their name from the test's name

[huonw]

E.g.

#[test]
fn test_foo() {
    assert_eq!(1, 2);
}

would be more useful it if it printed task 'test_foo' failed at 'assertion failed: ... rather than task '<unnamed>' failed at 'assertion failed: ....

This would make finding the cause of a FAILED in the spew of #[should_fail] fail!s easier, at least until we get capturing/redisplay-as-necessary of the output.

[brson]

Awesome idea!

[alexcrichton]

I, too, think that sliced bread pales in comparison to this!