On 14 December 2013 10:12, Kim Gräsman <[email protected]> wrote:
> John Thompson built a tool like that a few weeks back: > https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang-tools-extra/tree/master/pp-trace > > for the specific purpose of testing PPCallbacks. He's been trying to > call attention to getting it into Clang core. > Hi Kim, An alternative would be to make it to the test-suite, so we're sure it gets at least tested once every few commits. There's a Regression directory which contains very quick tests that you (him) could include there. I'm still on the fence whether it's a good idea to build a separate > tool to test PPCallbacks, because failures would signal problems with > the tool, not with PPCallbacks. Intuitively, I think unit tests would > be better, but that was discouraged by someone else in the original > review. > I like unit tests, but not to the point where it makes things harder. Some of the comments that have been said in this list are very pertinent (and I had my share of problems with unit tests, code coverage, etc), so I won't defend any strategy in specific. If you could get your tests somewhere, it'd be already great. The test-suite seems like a good compromise, even if just temporarily. cheers, --renato
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
