labath added a comment.
================ Comment at: unittests/Signals/UnixSignalsTest.cpp:43 + +#define ASSERT_EQ_ARRAYS(expected, observed) \ + AssertEqArrays((expected), (observed), __FILE__, __LINE__); ---------------- eugene wrote: > labath wrote: > > This (and the function) should probably have an EXPECT_.. prefix instead, > > as it does not abort the evaluation of the function it is in (like other > > ASSERT_*** macros). > This function calls ASSERT_EQ so it does abort evaluation. Unfortunately it does not. If you look up what ASSERT_EQ does, you'll see that it basically amounts to `EXPECT_EQ(a,b); return;` <https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/googletest/docs/AdvancedGuide.md#assertion-placement>, <https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/googletest/docs/AdvancedGuide.md#using-assertions-in-sub-routines>. So it does abort, but only the top most frame. Since your topmost frame is the `AssertEqArrays` function, it will just do an early return from that, and the caller will happily continue. If you wanted to be fancy you could define the macro to something like `CompareArrays(...); if(HasFailure()) return;`. Another solution would be to write a comparison function that returns an `AssertionResult` <https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/googletest/docs/AdvancedGuide.md#using-a-function-that-returns-an-assertionresult> and then use that in EXPECT_TRUE/ASSERT_TRUE as you see fit (but that's probably overkill). https://reviews.llvm.org/D30520 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
