Fixed in r288863.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Eric Fiselier wrote:
> Investigating right now. Sorry for the breakage.
>
> On Dec 6, 2016 3:55 PM, "Matthias Braun via Phabricator" <
> revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> MatzeB added a comment.
>
> This breaks the test-suite lit scripts:
>
>
Investigating right now. Sorry for the breakage.
On Dec 6, 2016 3:55 PM, "Matthias Braun via Phabricator" <
revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote:
MatzeB added a comment.
This breaks the test-suite lit scripts:
Exception during script execution:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/mbra
MatzeB added a comment.
This breaks the test-suite lit scripts:
Exception during script execution:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/mbraun/dev/public_llvm/utils/lit/lit/run.py", line 183, in
execute_test
result = test.config.test_format.execute(test, self.lit_config)
File
jroelofs added a comment.
LGTM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27005
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
EricWF updated this revision to Diff 80168.
EricWF added a comment.
- Add unit tests as requested.
This patch is ready to go. If there are no objections in the next day or two
I'll commit it.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27005
Files:
utils/lit/lit/TestRunner.py
utils/lit/tests/Inputs/testrun
jroelofs added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D27005#603979, @EricWF wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D27005#603692, @jroelofs wrote:
>
> > Should probably add a testcase in lit/tests that exercises the new CUSTOM
> > parser stuff, so people working on LIT don't have to build/test li
EricWF added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D27005#603692, @jroelofs wrote:
> Should probably add a testcase in lit/tests that exercises the new CUSTOM
> parser stuff, so people working on LIT don't have to build/test libc++ in
> order to know whether they've broken its testsuite.
I p
jroelofs added a comment.
Should probably add a testcase in lit/tests that exercises the new CUSTOM
parser stuff, so people working on LIT don't have to build/test libc++ in order
to know whether they've broken its testsuite.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27005
_
EricWF updated this revision to Diff 78988.
EricWF added a comment.
Pepify the changed lines.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27005
Files:
utils/lit/lit/TestRunner.py
Index: utils/lit/lit/TestRunner.py
===
--- utils/lit/lit/TestRunner
mgrang added a comment.
I ran pep8 on this script:
line 742: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1
line 757: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1
line 819: E301 expected 1 blank line, found 0
Can you pep-ify this script?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27005
___
EricWF created this revision.
EricWF added reviewers: ddunbar, modocache, rnk, danalbert, jroelofs.
EricWF added subscribers: cfe-commits, llvm-commits.
Libc++ frequently has the need to parse more than just the builtin *test
keywords* (`RUN`, `REQUIRES`, `XFAIL`, ect). For example libc++ current
11 matches
Mail list logo
