Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-16 Thread Jim Ingham via lldb-commits
jingham added a comment. Thanks for dealing with this! Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-16 Thread Ying Chen via lldb-commits
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL253272: Re-Apply "Add a "not_in()" function you can apply to the list type arguments… (authored by chying). Changed prior to commit: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673?vs=40353&id=40357#toc Repository: r

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-16 Thread Ying Chen via lldb-commits
chying updated this revision to Diff 40353. chying added a comment. Rebase on the latest commit. http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673 Files: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/functionalities/breakpoint/consecutive_breakpoins/TestConsecutiveBreakpoints.py packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/lldbtest.py

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-16 Thread Ying Chen via lldb-commits
chying added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673#290556, @zturner wrote: > Ahh, sorry. I litearlly just committed a change to the same function. You > may have to do a merge, sorry about that. Ahh, I see, will merge again. http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-16 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
zturner added a comment. Ahh, sorry. I litearlly just committed a change to the same function. You may have to do a merge, sorry about that. http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llv

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-16 Thread Ying Chen via lldb-commits
chying updated this revision to Diff 40347. chying added a comment. Recommit r253106 - Add a "not_in()" function you can apply to the list type arguments to expectedFailureAll ... Initialize self.debug_info in Base::setUp() Check for None before calling "value in list" http://reviews.llvm.org/

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-16 Thread Ying Chen via lldb-commits
chying added a comment. The compiler None check is because inside of check_list_or_lambda function, it checks for "value in list_or_lamda", which will throw exception if value is None I agree that the code will be cleaner if debug_info is initialized to None. Will try to upload another patch soon

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-16 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
zturner added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673#290280, @jingham wrote: > If the problem is that the self of the test object doesn't always have a > debug_info setting, why not just always initialize it to None? Seems weird > to have a general property like this that we don't initia

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-16 Thread Jim Ingham via lldb-commits
jingham added a comment. If the problem is that the self of the test object doesn't always have a debug_info setting, why not just always initialize it to None? Seems weird to have a general property like this that we don't initialize. http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673 ___

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-13 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
zturner added a comment. Makes sense. If compiler is None, but compilerVersion is None, maybe you could just assert. Because that's an error in the use of the decorator IMO http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-13 Thread Ying Chen via lldb-commits
chying added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673#289408, @zturner wrote: > I guess this is ok. I don't like raising the `None` check outside the > function, but I don't see another way that isn't more convoluted. > > However, I think you still need to fix the grouping of the parenthese

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-13 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
zturner added a comment. I guess this is ok. I don't like raising the `None` check outside the function, but I don't see another way that isn't more convoluted. However, I think you still need to fix the grouping of the parentheses. the `compiler is None` should not override the version check

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-13 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
zturner added a comment. Ahh ok I see the problem. Sorry I didn't read your description. Let me think about it some more http://reviews.llvm.org/D14673 ___ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailma

Re: [Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-13 Thread Zachary Turner via lldb-commits
zturner added a subscriber: zturner. zturner added a comment. I think the `is None` check should go back inside the `check_list_or_lambda` function. Bringing it outside the function looks identical to me. If `None` is passed to the function, the `callable()` check will fail, and then the `els

[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D14673: Fix buildbot breakage after r253106

2015-11-13 Thread Ying Chen via lldb-commits
chying created this revision. chying added a reviewer: jingham. chying added a subscriber: lldb-commits. - expectedFailureAll takes single compiler name rather than compiler list because it also takes version which only apply to single compiler - Don't try to access self.debug_info if debug_info