On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Reid Kleckner <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 8:03 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 8:02 PM, David Majnemer >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 7:59 PM, David Blaikie <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 7:35 PM, David Majnemer >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Author: majnemer >> >> > Date: Sun Aug 25 21:35:51 2013 >> >> > New Revision: 189208 >> >> > >> >> > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=189208&view=rev >> >> > Log: >> >> > [-cxx-abi microsoft] Unnamed types are mangled less wrong >> >> >> >> Test case? >> > >> > >> > <unnamed-tag> is still wrong, <unnamed-tag>@ is just marginally less >> wrong. >> > I thought of this change more of a code cleanup than a bug-fix for >> mangling. >> >> A change in behavior really ought to have a test. If it's still wrong, >> a FIXME showing the ring mangling in the test case should suffice. >> >> The fact that this didn't break any existing tests seems to indicate >> that this area lacks coverage - adding tests now, even if they >> demonstrate the broken behavior & document what it should be, might be >> nice, so we can track progress towards correctness. > > > Right, I'd CHECK for the current mangling and have a FIXME with the > desired mangling. > We already have a PR tracking the broken behavior. I am not aware of any LLVM policy, codified or implicit, that asks for bug PRs to be encoded in the test suite. This particular mangling bug is fixed in http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1540
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
