chaoren added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/dosep.py:82
@@ +81,3 @@
+ with output_lock:
+ print >> sys.stderr, stdout
+ print >> sys.stderr, "[%s] FAILED" % name
----------------
Why did you move this here? Could you please move stderr here too? It seems
weird stderr is labeled but stdout isn't.
================
Comment at: test/dosep.py:102
@@ -89,2 +101,3 @@
test_counter.value += 1
+ sys.stdout.flush()
sys.stderr.flush()
----------------
This and `sys.stderr.flush()` should be under the `with output_lock:`. My
mistake. Sorry.
================
Comment at: test/dosep.py:142
@@ -128,2 +141,3 @@
passes, failures = parse_test_results(output)
- update_status(name, command, output if exit_status != 0 else None)
+ if exit_status == 0:
+ report_test_pass(name, output[1])
----------------
Could you please do:
```
if exit_status != 0:
report_test_failure(...)
elif output_on_success:
report_test_pass(...)
```
so it's completely silent on success?
================
Comment at: test/dosep.py:143
@@ +142,3 @@
+ if exit_status == 0:
+ report_test_pass(name, output[1])
+ else:
----------------
Do you mean `output[0]`? For consistency, should we print stderr for success
too? Even if it's mostly empty.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D11816
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
