aaron.ballman added subscribers: ChuanqiXu, tahonermann, Bigcheese.
aaron.ballman added a comment.

In D154130#4481763 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D154130#4481763>, @MrTrillian 
wrote:

> In D154130#4481673 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D154130#4481673>, @aaron.ballman 
> wrote:
>
>> Adding a few more folks who are interested in lit changes to try to get the 
>> review unstuck.
>>
>> FWIW, I worry about the subtlety of the `>` change because it's not entirely 
>> clear to me when I'd need to use `%>t` in a test. I worry code reviewers 
>> will miss this sort of thing and we'll only find out there's an issue when 
>> the test fails for someone with a problematic path. Is there a rule of thumb 
>> we should be following for its use?
>
> Thanks for the extra reviewers!
>
> 95% of the `%>t` are around clang modulemap files, because that code resolves 
> real paths in C++ by design, so I can't avoid it. In fact I should rename 
> `PREFIX_EXPANDED` to `MODULEMAP_PREFIX` so it would be much clearer.

Okay, if this is mostly specific to module maps, that may resolve most of my 
concern (we don't add a lot of new tests there, so it's less of a burden for 
reviewers). CC @ChuanqiXu @Bigcheese @tahonermann to see if there are modules 
concerns with this.

> There are three cases where I didn't expect to need the expanded paths: 
> `relative_include.m`, `case-insensitive-include-win.c` and 
> `module-header-mismatches.m`. There may be a way to change the clang 
> implementation so it does not need to have expanded paths, but that felt like 
> a different investigation.
>
> I'm happy to consider alternative syntaxes to `%>t` too.

I think the syntax is reasonable enough (at least, I don't have arguably better 
suggestions), it was more just the "how will I know when to use it?" concerns.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D154130/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D154130

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to