zturner added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39215#905259, @ted wrote:
> We build lldb, clang and tools for Hexagon only, and call them hexagon-lldb, > hexagon-clang, etc. The test infrastructure is smart enough to pick up > hexagon-lldb-mi if we tell it to run with hexagon-lldb using --executable; > will it be smart enough to run an in-tree hexagon-clang? > > @labath, we run on Windows using hexagon-clang and hexagon-clang++; don't > forget the embedded cases when choosing compilers and running tests. > > I'm all for removing redundant variables. I haven't checked the logic for deducing the cxx from the c, and vice versa. But if it's as simple as just adding or removing ++ from the end of the executable name, it should work. https://reviews.llvm.org/D39215 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
