[clang-tools-extra] r215839 - First version of a clang-rename tool.
chisophugis at gmail.com
Mon Aug 18 14:20:13 PDT 2014
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> On Sun Aug 17 2014 at 11:43:39 PM Rafael Espíndola <
> rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Note that we do want to migrate (most of) clang-format's tests to lit
>> > (because most of them are integration tests), but that's a different
>> Well, that was the topic of my reply :-)
>> When gtest is appropriate, do use it. My request was just to not build
>> another large test set that we want to migrate in the future.
> Then we agree! :) Please give specific feedback if you see a gtest test
> that you think should be a lit test!
In this case, it seems like you should write a unit test for the routine
that uses the offsets to actually do the renaming. Then you can write this
test as a lit test that checks that the relevant things get renamed.
Also, why are we committing code that is "grossly under-tested" in the
first place? (sorry if this was discussed in another thread)
-- Sean Silva
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cfe-commits