On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Ismail Pazarbasi < [email protected]> wrote:
> Thank you for feedback. I have updated the patch, so that it adds > fix-it test into the existing test/FixIt/fixit.cpp, and entire patch > is in single file. > (you may've forgotten to attach the latest iteration?) > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:50 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Ismail Pazarbasi > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I have made this a while ago, but didn't have a chance to submit it. > >> > >> When an invalid destructor name is found within a class scope, a > >> fix-it hint will be issued to correct the destructor name so that it > >> matches the class name. > > > > > > Looks pretty good. Rather than adding another test file - perhaps you > could > > just add this fixit case to the general test/FixIt/fixit.cpp or similarly > > general test case (avoiding extra process invocations keeps the > regression > > test execution time down) > > > > For future reference: providing a single patch that includes both > production > > changes & tests is fine/easy/good. > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
