Hi Paul, I'm not to strongly opposing to anything, and I don't want to be the noisy one in the corner. :)
The only point I have is that it's easier to control the environment in the TS and e2e tests are supposed to catch higher level problems that cannot be handled in Clang. We already have tests in clang that check for diagnostics, IR and other things. Expanding those can handle 99.9% of what Clang could possibly do without descending into assembly. Assembly errors are more complicated than just "not generating VADD", and that's easier done in the TS than LIT. On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 at 15:55, Robinson, Paul <paul.robin...@sony.com> wrote: > Yep. Although I run check-all before *starting* on a patch, to make sure > the starting point is clean. It usually is, but I've been caught enough > times to be slightly wary. Ah! yes! Been there, too. :) _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
