dblaikie added a comment. In D141625#4100660 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D141625#4100660>, @akyrtzi wrote:
>> would be great to test it more in a semantic way if possible > > Keep in mind that the specific order of the decls doesn't matter for the > purposes of this test, what matters is that the order is the same every time > for the same input. > > I personally think that the addition of "Spot check entries to make sure they > are in current ordering" is counter-productive, because if later on some > clang changes end up changing the order then the test will fail, and will > need update, but that it is not what the test should care about, it should > only fail if the order is non-deterministic. > But I don't feel strongly about it, I'm fine with adding the ordered check > even though I don't think it's a good idea. I agree it's brittle/not ideal/a tradeoff - I'd like a test that is more stable to /some/ unrelated changes (ie: not testing the numbered values, but testing something a bit more semantically). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D141625/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D141625 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
