Author: labath
Date: Wed Mar 21 02:43:50 2018
New Revision: 328083
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=328083&view=rev
Log:
Fix TestOperatorOverload for 32-bit builds
- use more goodies from Makefile.rules to correctly build a 32-bit
binary.
- avoid hardcoding typeof(nil) in the test.
T
Instead of trying to guess how the shell will interpret your command line,
it would be better to just use a primitive which bypasses the shell
altogether. For example you can use subprocess.call(), and just forward it
the list of arguments verbatim.
You'd need to do some special processing on the
You are absolutely right.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44728
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Pavel Labath wrote:
> Instead of trying to guess how the shell will interpret your command line,
> it would be better to just use a primitive which bypasses the shell
> altogether. For example you can us
JDevlieghere updated this revision to Diff 139270.
JDevlieghere added a comment.
Re-add accidentally removed comment.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44728
Files:
test/CMakeLists.txt
test/lldb-dotest.in
Index: test/lldb-dotest.in
=
JDevlieghere created this revision.
JDevlieghere added reviewers: labath, vsk.
Herald added subscribers: llvm-commits, mgorny.
As suggested by Pavel on lldb-commits. Originally I picked os.system because it
was so much more simple than the subprocess module, but that no longer holds
true after y
labath accepted this revision.
labath added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Thank you. This looks good, assuming that the LLDB_DOTEST_ARGS_STR thingy is
working as intended.
Comment at: test/lldb-dotest.in:6
dotest_path = '@LLDB_SOURCE_DIR@/test/d
JDevlieghere marked an inline comment as done.
JDevlieghere added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D44728#1044255, @labath wrote:
> Thank you. This looks good, assuming that the LLDB_DOTEST_ARGS_STR thingy is
> working as intended.
Good catch, the variable was still available from the c
Author: labath
Date: Wed Mar 21 04:10:57 2018
New Revision: 328088
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=328088&view=rev
Log:
Fix crash exposed by r328025
The issue was that the ASTDumper was being passed a null pointer
(because we did not create any declaration for the operator==). The
c
Author: jdevlieghere
Date: Wed Mar 21 04:13:56 2018
New Revision: 328089
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=328089&view=rev
Log:
[dotest] Use subprocess.call to forward arguments in wrapper
As suggested by Pavel on lldb-commits. Originally I picked os.system
because it was so much more
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL328089: [dotest] Use subprocess.call to forward arguments in
wrapper (authored by JDevlieghere, committed by ).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44728?vs=139270&id=139274#toc
Reposito
labath added a comment.
The Terminate function is a good place to do this kind of cleanup.
Comment at: source/Plugins/Language/D/DLanguage.cpp:34-36
+// D Plugin will define these symbols. They're declared to use with decltype.
+extern "C" {
+// called once, to initialize drunt
It wasn't actually a linux issue, but a logging issue. The reason you
couldn't reproduce this locally is because we don't have logging on by
default (but our bot does, to help figuring out what's wrong when things
break). I haven't tried, but I'm pretty sure the test would break on mac as
well if y
BTW, during the "great lldb reformat" it was decided that our python files
should follow the official python formatting rules (4 space indent) and not
the llvm style guide (2 space).
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 at 11:35, Pavel Labath wrote:
> It wasn't actually a linux issue, but a logging issue. The r
labath created this revision.
labath added a reviewer: owenpshaw.
First attempt at landing https://reviews.llvm.org/D42145 was reverted because
it caused test
failures on some android devices. It turned out this was because these
devices had vdso modules with differing physical and virtual addres
labath created this revision.
labath added reviewers: JDevlieghere, clayborg.
The llvm function is practically a drop-in replacement. There may be
slight differences in performance as the llvm version uses a switch
whereas our version used a lookup table, but I can't say which way that
will go. (I
Author: labath
Date: Wed Mar 21 08:29:32 2018
New Revision: 328106
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=328106&view=rev
Log:
Last batch of test-tree cleaning changes
- postmortem tests: make sure the core files are created in the build
folder
- TestSourceManager: copy the .c file into t
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 2:43 AM, Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
wrote:
> Author: labath
> Date: Wed Mar 21 02:43:50 2018
> New Revision: 328083
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=328083&view=rev
> Log:
> Fix TestOperatorOverload for 32-bit builds
>
> - use more goodies from Makefile.r
Affirmative.
I've checked the compiler invocations before and after the patch. -g goes
only to b.cpp. (also, this is the same pattern we use for other tests which
want to build stuff with no debug info).
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 at 15:47, Davide Italiano wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 2:43 AM, Pa
tromey added a comment.
I've also noticed that int->float conversion in Scalar seems incorrect. At
least, Scalar.h claims that Scalar follows C promotion rules, but int->float
conversion is done using bitwise reinterpretation rather than preserving the
value. I have a patch for this, but I do
clayborg added a comment.
Looks fine. It would be nice to verify that there are no performance
regressions due to this before making this change. Can you do some timings to
make sure? Do anything that indexes a large C++ DWARF codebase, like clang, and
make sure we don't regress by a significan
clayborg requested changes to this revision.
clayborg added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
Actually, we should add a test for this to ensure this doesn't regress.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44693
___
lldb-commits mailing li
clayborg added a comment.
Seems like a unit test would work well in this case.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44693
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
davide added a comment.
Yes, this needs a test. Thanks!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44693
___
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
clayborg added a comment.
Bonus points for catching any other conversion errors that don't match the
current C/C++ specs. The unit tests should be an easy place to test these kinds
of things.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44693
___
lldb-commits mailin
24 matches
Mail list logo
