[PATCH] D26139: Tests for strings conversions under libcpp-no-exceptions

2016-11-14 Thread Roger Ferrer Ibanez via cfe-commits
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL286812: Update tests for strings conversions under libcpp-no-exceptions (authored by rogfer01). Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26139?vs=76373&id=9#toc Repository: rL LLVM htt

[PATCH] D26139: Tests for strings conversions under libcpp-no-exceptions

2016-11-14 Thread Eric Fiselier via cfe-commits
EricWF accepted this revision. EricWF added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LGTM. The consensus is against adding `TEST_TRY` and `TEST_CATCH`. https://reviews.llvm.org/D26139 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists

[PATCH] D26139: Tests for strings conversions under libcpp-no-exceptions

2016-11-11 Thread Roger Ferrer Ibanez via cfe-commits
rogfer01 added a comment. I'd rather not to go the way of `TEST_TRY` and `TEST_CASE` macros. As suggested by @rmaprath, I've been playing with grouping the tests in three categories: no exceptions (at all), should not throw, must throw. No changes are required for the first group. The third gro

[PATCH] D26139: Tests for strings conversions under libcpp-no-exceptions

2016-11-06 Thread Asiri Rathnayake via cfe-commits
rmaprath added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D26139#587587, @mclow.lists wrote: > > I think it might be better to add TEST_TRY and TEST_CATCH(...) macros > > defined like > > @rogfer01 said at the top that he didn't want to add "a magical TEST_TRY > macro" - and I agree. Someone tri

[PATCH] D26139: Tests for strings conversions under libcpp-no-exceptions

2016-11-05 Thread Marshall Clow via cfe-commits
mclow.lists added a comment. > I think it might be better to add TEST_TRY and TEST_CATCH(...) macros > defined like @rogfer01 said at the top that he didn't want to add "a magical TEST_TRY macro" - and I agree. Someone tried that in another review, and I nixed it there. https://reviews.llv

[PATCH] D26139: Tests for strings conversions under libcpp-no-exceptions

2016-11-04 Thread Eric Fiselier via cfe-commits
EricWF added inline comments. Comment at: test/std/strings/string.conversions/stold.pass.cpp:39 assert(idx == 2); +#ifndef TEST_HAS_NO_EXCEPTIONS try Hmm. All of these `#ifdef`s get ugly fast. I think it might be better to add `TEST_TRY` and `TEST_CATC

[PATCH] D26139: Tests for strings conversions under libcpp-no-exceptions

2016-11-02 Thread Asiri Rathnayake via cfe-commits
rmaprath added a comment. Would it be more cleaner to separate out the exceptions-related tests into their own functions? So, we'd have the two functions `test_withexceptions()` and `test_noexceptions()`; the former will only be invoked when testing the normal library variant, the latter will b

[PATCH] D26139: Tests for strings conversions under libcpp-no-exceptions

2016-10-31 Thread Roger Ferrer Ibanez via cfe-commits
rogfer01 created this revision. rogfer01 added reviewers: mclow.lists, EricWF, rmaprath. rogfer01 added a subscriber: cfe-commits. These files have two styles of tests // First style try { action assert(something-expected); } catch ( exception ) { assert(false); } // Seco