[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +# RUN: echo "// comment" > %t.input +# RUN: which llvm-mc | %python %s %t + +import subprocess +import sys + +llvm_mc_binary = sys.stdin.readlines()[0].strip() +temp_file = sys.argv[1] petrhosek wrote: Shouldn't this be `sys.argv[2]`? `sys.argv[

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

https://github.com/boomanaiden154 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 >From d749f30964e57caa797b3df87ae88ffc3d4a2f54 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Aiden Grossman Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2025 17:39:19 + Subject: [PATCH 1/3] feedback Created using spr 1.3.6 --- llvm/test/MC/C

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +# RUN: echo "// comment" > %t.input +# RUN: which llvm-mc | %python %s %t + +import subprocess +import sys + +llvm_mc_binary = sys.stdin.readlines()[0].strip() +temp_file = sys.argv[1] boomanaiden154 wrote: Python doesn't include the interpreter

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

ilovepi wrote: > Somewhat off-topic for this PR, but why can't `REQUIRES: shell` force use of > shell even if internal shell is the default? Then we don't lose test coverage > and don't block this on migration of the long-tail of tests. Previously, we've discussed giving lit a hybrid mode tha

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

https://github.com/petrhosek approved this pull request. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +# RUN: echo "// comment" > %t.input +# RUN: which llvm-mc | %python %s %t boomanaiden154 wrote: Done. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

https://github.com/boomanaiden154 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 >From d749f30964e57caa797b3df87ae88ffc3d4a2f54 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Aiden Grossman Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2025 17:39:19 + Subject: [PATCH 1/3] feedback Created using spr 1.3.6 --- llvm/test/MC/C

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

https://github.com/boomanaiden154 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 >From d749f30964e57caa797b3df87ae88ffc3d4a2f54 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Aiden Grossman Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2025 17:39:19 + Subject: [PATCH 1/2] feedback Created using spr 1.3.6 --- llvm/test/MC/C

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

https://github.com/ilovepi edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

boomanaiden154 wrote: > Somewhat off-topic for this PR, but why can't REQUIRES: shell force use of > shell even if internal shell is the default? Then we don't lose test coverage > and don't block this on migration of the long-tail of tests. That's another option. The long tail isn't actually

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

nikic wrote: > > I don't know if I understand what you're going for in this patch. How is > > this an improvement over just keeping REQUIRES: shell? The REQUIRES: bit > > is what's going to stop the test from running in the wrong environment. > > That seems like the right tradeoff. > > If we

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

boomanaiden154 wrote: > The previous, uglified lld tests, and this, make me believe that we should > revisit the lit feature. I am not sure I agree with this test rewriting. I understand the argument that the tests in #156526 look a bit worse. It's not an opinion that everyone shares though. @

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

MaskRay wrote: The previous, uglified lld tests, and this, make me believe that we should revisit the lit feature. I am not sure I agree with this test rewriting. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list ll

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

https://github.com/boomanaiden154 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 >From d749f30964e57caa797b3df87ae88ffc3d4a2f54 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Aiden Grossman Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2025 17:39:19 + Subject: [PATCH] feedback Created using spr 1.3.6 --- llvm/test/MC/COFF/

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

https://github.com/boomanaiden154 updated https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 >From d749f30964e57caa797b3df87ae88ffc3d4a2f54 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Aiden Grossman Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2025 17:39:19 + Subject: [PATCH] feedback Created using spr 1.3.6 --- llvm/test/MC/COFF/

[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] [MC] Rewrite stdin.s to use python (PR #157232)

https://github.com/boomanaiden154 edited https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/157232 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits