At some point I really would love to reduce the number of decorators. It's starting to get ridiculous :)
Seems like we only need one decorator that takes everything as optional arguments On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 10:42 AM Tamas Berghammer <tbergham...@google.com> wrote: > tberghammer added a comment. > > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13028#250822, @clayborg wrote: > > > Looks good. For the failing test cases, just check this stuff in and we > should take care or marking any needed tests and expected fail. Is there a > way to mark a test such that the "dwarf in .o files" will expected fail if > we need to do that? If there currently isn't, we need to add the ability to > say that normal dwarf (dSYM file for MacOSX or dwarf in object file for all > other platforms), DWO, and dwarf in .o files (apple) can be marked as > expected fail, skip, etc... > > > I added an [expectedFailure,expectedFlakey,skipIf][Dwarf,Dsym] (will add > Dwo whit the rest of the dwo specific logic) decorators and we can also > specify the debug info for expectedFailureAll. If we need more decorators > then we can add them the first time we have to use them (the debug info > fomrat is stored in self.debug_info as a string) > > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D13028 > > > >
_______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
