jubnzv added inline comments.

================
Comment at: 
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines-pro-type-vararg-ms.cpp:7
+
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s cppcoreguidelines-pro-type-vararg %t
+
----------------
probinson wrote:
> probinson wrote:
> > TWeaver wrote:
> > > njames93 wrote:
> > > > TWeaver wrote:
> > > > > Is the missing FileCheck call here on purpose? it seems to me that 
> > > > > the CHECK-MESSAGES aren't actually being verified by this test?
> > > > > 
> > > > > unless I'm missing something.
> > > > > 
> > > > > TIA
> > > > `check_clang_tidy` invokes FileCheck. Does something else make you 
> > > > think these labels are being tested?? 
> > > whilst investigating an unrelated issue on our internal branch, I tried 
> > > editting the check lines in this test and wasn't able to create a 
> > > failure. but if I add
> > > 
> > > '| FileCheck %s -check-prefix=CHECK-MESSAGES' to the run line and then 
> > > edit the checks, I can induce an error.
> > > 
> > > This could be an issue on our internal branch though... :shrug: thanks 
> > > for the speedy reply.
> > I'm suspicious that our downstream problem is because the test is assuming 
> > that the target is Windows, just because the host is.  That's not true for 
> > us (or anyone with a Windows-hosted cross-compiler).  Does clang-tidy 
> > accept a target triple?
> Or possibly the test could be set up to require a Windows target, rather than 
> a Windows host.
I'm not sure that there is a way to pass a target triple to `clang-tidy`.

But `llvm-lit` should not run this test on non-Windows host because of 
`REQUIRES: system-windows`. For example, when I trying to run it on my Debian 
machine (`llvm-lit 
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines-pro-type-vararg-ms.cpp
 -v`) I got the following result:

```
-- Testing: 1 tests, 1 workers --
UNSUPPORTED: Clang Tools :: 
clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines-pro-type-vararg-ms.cpp (1 of 1)

Testing Time: 0.01s
  Unsupported: 1
```


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D101259/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D101259

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to