aprantl added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54187#1290298, @probinson wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54187#1290294, @zturner wrote: > > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54187#1290282, @probinson wrote: > > > > > +gbedwell > > > > > > Just to throw the idea out there, why not abandon debuginfo-tests > > > entirely and try using Dexter for this. Dexter's design center is > > > debug-info quality, not correctness, but it already knows how to drive > > > several different debuggers on multiple platforms. > > > Dexter would have to become an LLVM project tool, and I'm not sure how > > > Sony management feels about that, but I think this would be an awesome > > > use-case. > > > > > > Depends where we draw the distinction between quality and correctness. We > > specifically want a way to test that when we fix a correctness bug, it's > > actually fixed against Microsoft debuggers. > > > Dexter knows how to drive Visual Studio tools already, as well as gdb and > (maybe) lldb. I have never looked inside it but I'd expect Greg to have made > it straightforward to add new tools. If it fits our use-cases, that sounds like a great idea. Are there some examples of dexter input/outputs we could take a look at to see how good of a fit it would be? https://reviews.llvm.org/D54187 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
