================
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
 // RUN: rm -rf %t
 // RUN: split-file %s %t
 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -flifetime-safety-inference 
-fexperimental-lifetime-safety-tu-analysis -Wlifetime-safety-suggestions 
-Wlifetime-safety -Wno-dangling -I%t -verify %t/test_source.cpp
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -flifetime-safety-inference 
-fexperimental-lifetime-safety-tu-analysis -Wlifetime-safety-suggestions 
-Wlifetime-safety -Wno-dangling -I%t -fixit %t/test_source.cpp
+// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -flifetime-safety-inference 
-fexperimental-lifetime-safety-tu-analysis -Wlifetime-safety-suggestions 
-Wno-dangling -I%t -Werror=lifetime-safety-suggestions %t/test_source.cpp
----------------
vbvictor wrote:

Given this is a kinda common pattern in diagnostics verification, I'd rather 
leave it as is.

> > -Werror=lifetime-safety-suggetions

Typically these tests just use `-Werror`, but there were other warnings in file 
so I had to do `=lifetime-safety-suggetions` '

> This seems quite clever. I think we can do something simpler to verify that 
> there are no suggestions left.

I think this is the simplest form because it's used in other places of LLVM, so 
I'd want to keep current pattern. 


https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/177763
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to