================
@@ -1292,6 +1292,31 @@ void func() {}
EXPECT_EQ(attrCount, 1);
}
+TEST_F(LibclangParseTest, clang_getSpellingLocation) {
+ std::string fileName = "main.c";
+ WriteFile(fileName, "#define X(value) int x = value;\nX(42)\n");
+
+ ClangTU = clang_parseTranslationUnit(Index, fileName.c_str(), nullptr, 0,
+ nullptr, 0, TUFlags);
+
+ Traverse([](CXCursor cursor, CXCursor parent) -> CXChildVisitResult {
+ if (cursor.kind == CXCursor_VarDecl) {
+ CXSourceLocation cxl = clang_getCursorLocation(cursor);
+ unsigned line;
+
+ // We expect clang_getFileLocation to return the expansion location,
+ // whereas clang_getSpellingLocation should resolve the macro expansion
+ // and return the location of the macro definition.
+ clang_getFileLocation(cxl, nullptr, &line, nullptr, nullptr);
+ EXPECT_EQ(line, 2U);
+ clang_getSpellingLocation(cxl, nullptr, &line, nullptr, nullptr);
+ EXPECT_EQ(line, 1U);
+ }
+
+ return CXChildVisit_Recurse;
+ });
+}
----------------
jansvoboda11 wrote:
I think we should adopt the pattern used in other unit tests in this file where
we initialize a counter to 0 before calling `Traverse()` and after it returns
check we actually visited the expected number of nodes. Otherwise this test
might pass trivially without performing any checks if the inner block is not
executed.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72400
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
