labath added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lldb/unittests/SymbolFile/DWARF/SymbolFileDWARFTests.cpp:369 + EXPECT_EQ(section_sp->GetType(), eSectionTypeCode); +} ---------------- clayborg wrote: > I would rather deal with an C++ unit test any day. Trying to track down what > set of convoluted command line commands reproduce some lit test is quite > annoying and takes me a lot more time to debug. I think this test is targeted > and tests what is needed. I would vote to keep this one over converting to a > text dump test. My main reasoning is that it isn't possible to re-create a > compilable test case that will survive any compiler that it used (past, > present and future), and all symbol resolution is done bone using this call > in all cases. When something goes wrong, very easy to compile the binary and > debug. If we put this up for a vote, I think you'd be in the minority. :) I'm not sure what you find hard about reproducing a lit test -- the commands to do that get printed as a part of the test. And most of the time you don't need to run all the command to reproduce it -- running the last one suffices as the intermediate files are left over from the previous test run. I consider the leftover temporaries as one of the best aspects of this method. In this case, I could for example run llvm-dwarfdump on the intermediate object file to better understand the input that lldb gets. Note that I am not advocating changing the test input to c++ source. I think the yaml is just fine (if I was writing it, I would probably have made that an assembler file). I just meant changing the test method by prefixing the yaml with something like: ``` # RUN: yaml2obj %s > %t # RUN: %lldb %t -b -o "image lookup -f main.cpp -l 2" | FileCheck %s # CHECK: LineEntry: {{.*}}main.cpp:2 # or something like that ``` Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87172/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87172 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits