On Tuesday, July 08, 2014 6:54 PM, David Blaikie wrote:
Oh, that's fair. It'd be good to provide a comment in the test case
explaining this (the external use case), since I could imagine someone
coming back and thinking this is a bit silly to have for writing
internal test cases. (& hopefully we'll avoid proliferation of this
feature in internal test cases just by code review)

One thought on the code/design: would it be reasonable to, rather than
having the "MatchAllLines" flag, use an invalid ExpectedLoc? You might
still need a small-scoped "MatchAllLines" (I'd perhaps rename it to
"MatchAnyLine"?) due to the invalid ExpectedLoc used to determine
whether to report err_verify_missing_line, but after that you could
probably set ExpectedLoc to invalid and use that?

We cannot use an invalid ExpectedLoc since we must also match the file
name when checking the diagnostic lists, however I have implemented your
requests in the attached patch.  With your approval, I will commit it.


On Tuesday, July 08, 2014 6:10 PM, Jordan Rose wrote:
The analyzer would get mild use out of this too; we have "system header
simulators" shared across multiple files, and encoding line numbers in
each file that uses the header is somewhat brittle when the header
needs to change. Although I just realized that #line might be able to
get around that...

#line is probably ok where a header file is simple, and indeed for
internal test-cases this could be ideal if you are trying to pin down
a diagnostic to a particular line of code.  I would beware of creating
complications if more than one line ended up with the same line number!


Cheers
Andy

Attachment: verify.patch
Description: Binary data

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to