Even in this exact case we have the multiple variants situation. If we use the substitutions method we would reduce the test coverage by half, which doesn’t seem like a good idea.
Similarly, in the target variables tests i added to the native pdb plugin Jim was asking if I could also enable that exact same test for other platforms. But it’s not possible without a way to run multiple variants. And for tests where no running process is required I think it’s a worthy goal to try to do that. On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 6:04 AM Pavel Labath <pa...@labath.sk> wrote: > On 26/10/18 18:34, Zachary Turner wrote: > > I was thinking about this some more and I’m not sure simple > > substitutions will suffice. > > > > We can provide substitutions to abstract away the command line, but that > > doesn’t doesn’t really address the issue that we still need to have a > > way to then run the the test program with each of the build outputs. > > Keep in mind that it might take more than one compiler and/or linker > > invocation to generate an output, and more than one lldb-test invocation > > for the checks. > > > > The best idea I have for now is to split the check file into a common > > file that everyone can share, but the lldb-test lines can be copied. So > > there is one .test file for windows, one for non windows, each with only > > RUN lines, both sharing a common check file. > > > > I don’t think we should block this patch on coming up with something > > more complicated than this though > > > > The substitutions won't help if you're planning to run multiple variants > of the same test (e.g. a DWARF and a PDB version) on all hosts. However, > if you always just want to run a single version of the test (e.g., for > the host), then it's enough to have a substitution which builds the > given version of the executable. > > Given how the memory map tests are implemented right now (they require a > running process, and they don't care too much about the details of how > the debugee was built), this should be sufficient. I don't think we will > ever have two flavours of these tests run in the same instance of the > test suite, as it would require us the specify how to launch and debug > an executable on multiple hosts. > > So, I'd recommend to stick with the substitution idea until we come up > with something better. > > pl >
_______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
