gamesh411 wrote:

I have considered the following approach first:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/23514c5262e28f3cae352a0cfbe5c7de6b186a9e
That one increases test coverage at the cost of introducing some duplication in 
diagnostics expectations, as we have discussed in #186802.
The current PR makes the tests simpler (technically reducing coverage, but IMO, 
in practice, coverage stays the same: we only lose the non-header-guarded 
code's coverage from run-lines that *do* use those preprocessor symbols). So 
there is a tradeoff here.
I am not heavily invested in either solution.
@steakhal, if you think that direction is better than this, I'll just update 
this PR to go that way. 

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/188709
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to