[clang-tools-extra] r209141 - Improved llvm-namespace-comment check.

[Alexander Kornienko]

We use lit tests for diagnostic messages. Currently they use FileCheck, but
it probably makes sense to implement an analog of Clang's -verify in
clang-tidy.

As for the tests for fix-its, I consider unit tests to be more readable for
this purpose. They are also more isolated and closer to the check itself.
In a lit test, if we verify the full text of the output, the FileCheck
tests become quite bulky. Another reason to put these checks in the unit
tests, is that each new lit test file has non-trivial run-time overhead.


On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Is there a particular reason that this is being tested with unittests
> instead of the usual lit tests? This kind of thing seems like it would be a
> lot more readable as a lit test.
>
> -- Sean Silva
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140521/54ba8dd9/attachment.html>