mstorsjo added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Driver/mingw-sysroot.cpp:25-38
// RUN: env "PATH=%T/testroot-gcc/bin:%PATH%" %clang -target
x86_64-w64-mingw32 -rtlib=platform -stdlib=libstdc++ --sysroot="" -c -### %s
2>&1 | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK_TESTROOT_GCC %s
// CHECK_TESTROOT_GCC: "-internal-isystem"
"[[BASE:[^"]+]]/testroot-gcc{{/|\\\\}}lib{{/|\\\\}}gcc{{/|\\\\}}x86_64-w64-mingw32{{/|\\\\}}10.2-posix{{/|\\\\}}include{{/|\\\\}}c++"
// CHECK_TESTROOT_GCC-SAME: {{^}} "-internal-isystem"
"[[BASE]]/testroot-gcc{{/|\\\\}}lib{{/|\\\\}}gcc{{/|\\\\}}x86_64-w64-mingw32{{/|\\\\}}10.2-posix{{/|\\\\}}include{{/|\\\\}}c++{{/|\\\\}}x86_64-w64-mingw32"
// CHECK_TESTROOT_GCC-SAME: {{^}} "-internal-isystem"
"[[BASE]]/testroot-gcc{{/|\\\\}}lib{{/|\\\\}}gcc{{/|\\\\}}x86_64-w64-mingw32{{/|\\\\}}10.2-posix{{/|\\\\}}include{{/|\\\\}}c++{{/|\\\\}}backward"
// CHECK_TESTROOT_GCC: "-internal-isystem"
"[[BASE]]/testroot-gcc{{/|\\\\}}lib{{/|\\\\}}gcc{{/|\\\\}}x86_64-w64-mingw32{{/|\\\\}}10.2-posix{{/|\\\\}}include{{/|\\\\}}g++-v10.2-posix"
// CHECK_TESTROOT_GCC: "-internal-isystem"
"[[BASE]]/testroot-gcc{{/|\\\\}}lib{{/|\\\\}}gcc{{/|\\\\}}x86_64-w64-mingw32{{/|\\\\}}10.2-posix{{/|\\\\}}include{{/|\\\\}}g++-v10.2"
// CHECK_TESTROOT_GCC: "-internal-isystem"
"[[BASE]]/testroot-gcc{{/|\\\\}}lib{{/|\\\\}}gcc{{/|\\\\}}x86_64-w64-mingw32{{/|\\\\}}10.2-posix{{/|\\\\}}include{{/|\\\\}}g++-v10"
----------------
alvinhochun wrote:
> mstorsjo wrote:
> > alvinhochun wrote:
> > > I think this only verifies that the include path is not present after the
> > > last `CHECK_TESTROOT_GCC` match. The [[
> > > https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html#cmdoption-filecheck-implicit-check-not
> > > | --implicit-check-not ]] option should be used to check that the
> > > pattern is not present anywhere in the output.
> > Right - that's true (although this is the spot where the entry did appear
> > before - I checked that the test did fail before applying the functional
> > change).
> >
> > I tried adding `--implicit-check-not` here, but the quoting/escaping of the
> > regexes seems tricky - even getting it to recognize the literal quotes
> > surrounding the string.
> >
> > I tried with
> > `--implicit-check-not="\"{{.*}}/testroot-gcc{{/|\\\\}}x86_64-w64-mingw32{{/|\\\\}}include\""`,
> > but that's not working (i.e. it's not detecting anything even when I
> > remove the functional change of the patch). With a trivial reduction of it,
> > into `--implicit-check-not="testroot-gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/include"`, it's
> > detecting things as expected (but that quote gets handled by the shell, so
> > this would match any substring, such as `.../include/subdir` too. But even
> > `--implicit-check-not="testroot-gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/include\""` does not
> > match correctly.
> >
> > The documentation says that the `--implicit-check-not` option does take a
> > pattern, but it doesn't really say what's allowed in that pattern -
> > apparently not the full syntax used in normal `CHECK` lines at least...
> Maybe it's a problem with escaping those backslashes? I think the command
> line is interpreted by lit which has its own escaping rules.
Ah, sorry for the noise, I just messed up with a typo - I got it working now.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D141206/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D141206
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
