NoQ added inline comments.
================ Comment at: test/Analysis/NewDelete-path-notes.cpp:44 // CHECK-NEXT: <dict> -// CHECK-NEXT: <key>line</key><integer>6</integer> +// CHECK-NEXT: <key>line</key><integer>7</integer> // CHECK-NEXT: <key>col</key><integer>3</integer> ---------------- a.sidorin wrote: > NoQ wrote: > > a.sidorin wrote: > > > Not even a minor concern for this patch, but I think that placing `//RUN` > > > and `//CHECK` after the code being tested could save us from massive > > > changes of line numbers. > > Hmm, not sure if i understand, you mean //before// the code? (it would save > > us from line number changes in plists, but it'd make the tests harder to > > read because you'd have to scroll all the way down through the plist to > > find the actual code). > I mean placing RUNs after the program code (but before `// CHECK`. Anyway, > moving RUNs below will cause... line changes so it is not an important issue. Hmm, yeah, right, maybe. So there would be no line number issues until we stick a test in between two other tests or modify existing tests. But i'm still too used to having RUNs above everything, i guess, to just quickly figure out what does the test do. Also it's not hard to regenerate line numbers (even if it looks scary). https://reviews.llvm.org/D41800 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
