> On Jan 21, 2016, at 10:17 AM, Zachary Turner <ztur...@google.com> wrote: > > zturner added a comment. > > Sure, an interface change to Process might break the mock, but it would break > at compile time, you just fix it up. It's not something that would happen > frequently, this is the same situation going on in LLVM where there are unit > tests, sometimes they break, and people fix them. But it's never been an > issue because it doesn't happen often. > > I know there are different opinions about what type of tests to write and how > reduced they should be, but in this case I'm simply following the LLVM > guidelines for writing test cases, which we supposed to adhere to. > http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#test-cases (except for obvious > differences about how it uses lit, etc)
I do not think that we should be restricted to guidelines for testing that are meant for a very different kind of program. You don't stop a compiler midway through a compile, drop into the "compiler command line", add a few more lines of code and a couple of functions, change some compiler options and continue. You give it input, and collect the output or errors. But you do the functionally equivalent thing in the debugger all the time. So the way you test things is going to be very different. Jim > > > http://reviews.llvm.org/D16334 > > > _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
