jingham added a comment. dotest tests don't require a process. Presumably dotest knows how to build windows targeted PDB debug flavor files (to go along with dwarf/dsym/etc.). So it would be straightforward to make a test that had your input sources, built and made a target out of it and then poked at static variables and their types. That would straightaway run with all the different symbol file formats we support.
That was why using Vedant's FileCheck thing made sense to me. You would use that to specify the test cases, since you like that way of writing tests and anyway already have them written out in that form, but use the dotest machinery to build it for whatever symfile format and target architecture/s the person who was running the test dialed up. But if you are interesting in also getting this to work with the straight FileCheck style test, your time is your own... BTW, I would use dotest tests specifically for the kind of thing you are doing here because then you can test against the SBType and SBTypeMembers from the debug info you've ingested, which would give you bit and byte offsets and sizes for free. But if your differing tastes end up getting you to add that info to "type lookup" - which we really should do - then I guess we win either way... https://reviews.llvm.org/D53731 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
