Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r280344 - XFail TestMemoryFind on 32-bit architectures

2016-09-02 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
Yeah, sorry about that, I wrote that message in a hurry. This was a generic issue with expressions in backticks (``) concerning the printing of pointers (or even integers, as I later found out) of different sizes. Basically a 64-bit pointer would get printed as a decimal value, but a 32-bit one in

Re: [Lldb-commits] [lldb] r280344 - XFail TestMemoryFind on 32-bit architectures

2016-09-01 Thread Enrico Granata via lldb-commits
I am probably being a little dense right now, but I can't seem to find (const char*)0x1000 anywhere in the test case code... > On Sep 1, 2016, at 2:17 AM, Pavel Labath via lldb-commits > wrote: > > Author: labath > Date: Thu Sep 1 04:17:37 2016 > New Revision: 280344 > > URL: http://llvm.org

[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r280344 - XFail TestMemoryFind on 32-bit architectures

2016-09-01 Thread Pavel Labath via lldb-commits
Author: labath Date: Thu Sep 1 04:17:37 2016 New Revision: 280344 URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=280344&view=rev Log: XFail TestMemoryFind on 32-bit architectures the test fails for a very prosaic reason: `(const char *)0x1000` returns "4096" on x86_64 and "1000" (without the "0x"