Szelethus added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/StaticAnalyzer/RegisterCustomCheckersTest.cpp:143
+ std::string Diags;
+ EXPECT_TRUE(runCheckerOnCode<addDependentChecker>("void f() {;}", Diags));
+}
----------------
baloghadamsoftware wrote:
> Szelethus wrote:
> > I don't think this is checking what you're looking for -- the test should
> > be whether `Diag` is an empty string, while `runCheckerOnCode` returns true
> > when the tool (the static analyzer, in this case) terminates successfully,
> > even if it doesn't work the way we expect it to.
> There could be hundreds of alternative approaches, but this test exactly
> simulates the real-world problem: the checker crashes because it should not
> be registered. Of course, I tried the test without the bugfix and it fails as
> it should because the tool terminates unsuccessfully if the prerequisite
> checker is registered.
This is still confusing. Please check the string, that should contain what you
need and nothing else, and the asserts could be removed as a result -- it
shouldn't be more then 5 lines.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75842/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75842
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
