tfiala added a comment. > We've already had a case when a test wasn't running for several months
before I noticed (see r257901) that it had a bad decorator applied at the class level. I've been thinking about this in the background lately. Several times over the last couple years I found decorator logic that had errors in them (literally, the code was throwing an exception within the decorator logic, such as using a module that isn't imported), but this will go by silently unless some work is put into logging errors there. If we haven't already, we should probably have some kind of exception wrapper around our decorators that catches non-unittest-related (i.e. unexpected) exceptions and somehow makes them more prevalent - maybe a hard error on the test or an abort or something. http://reviews.llvm.org/D16741 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
