paulkirth added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Driver/clang_f_opts.c:144
+// RUN: %clang -### -S -fprofile-instr-use=%t.profdata
-fdiagnostics-misexpect-tolerance=10 -Wmisexpect %s 2>&1 | FileCheck %s
--check-prefix=CHECK-MISEXPECT-TOLLERANCE
+// CHECK-MISEXPECT-TOLLERANCE-NOT: argument unused
{{.*}}-fdiagnostics-misexpect-tolerance=
+
----------------
hans wrote:
> Instead of checking for absence of the warning, could we just check that the
> flag is present among the cc1 flags? I think that's how most of the other
> tests here do it.
It took me a minute to realize what you meant here. I was pretty surprised to
find out that `"-fdiagnostics-misexpect-tolerance=10"` is how we test for
`cc1`, but `'-fdiagnostics-misexpect-tolerance='` is a test for an
error/warning string. The reason I wrote the check this way was so that I
wouldn't accidentally match on the non-warning case.
TBH Ithink checking the `cc1` flags like this is pretty brittle. They would all
silently pass (even when they shouldn't) if the warning diagnostic used `"`
instead of `'`. I'm sure some other tests would fail/need to be changed in that
case, but there wouldn't be any indication that these tests wouldn't be
functioning as intended.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D149206/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D149206
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
