dyung added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D19048#414568, @aprantl wrote:
> Thanks! > > Is there anything meaningful that could be CHECKed here? > Usually a crash means that we previously had a code path without test > coverage. This was definitely a code path without test coverage. When you ask whether there is anything meaningful that could be checked here, are you asking whether we can change the test from testing only that the compilation succeeds to checking something that the compiler produces? If so, I could change the test to produce llvm assembly (-S -emit-llvm) instead, and then perhaps check for the presence of a DIModule within the output. Would that make a better test? http://reviews.llvm.org/D19048 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
