r225051 - XFAIL test on win32 due to missing __complex support

[David Blaikie]

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org>
wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 2:30 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Author: dblaikie
>> Date: Wed Dec 31 16:30:31 2014
>> New Revision: 225051
>>
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=225051&view=rev
>> Log:
>> XFAIL test on win32 due to missing __complex support
>>
>> Modified:
>>     cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-line.cpp
>>
>> Modified: cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-line.cpp
>> URL:
>> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-line.cpp?rev=225051&r1=225050&r2=225051&view=diff
>>
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-line.cpp (original)
>> +++ cfe/trunk/test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-line.cpp Wed Dec 31 16:30:31 2014
>> @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
>>  // RUN: %clang_cc1 -g -std=c++11 -S -emit-llvm %s -o - | FileCheck %s
>>  // RUN: %clang_cc1 -triple i686-linux-gnu -g -std=c++11 -S -emit-llvm %s
>> -o - | FileCheck %s
>>
>> +// XFAIL: win32
>> +
>>
>
> This seems imprecise.  This *should* pass on i686-windows-gnu,
> {armv7,i686}-windows-itanium I believe.
>

Quite possibly - I'm open to other suggestions. Any idea what sort of
approach would be more precise?


>
>
>>  int &src();
>>  int *sink();
>>  extern "C" __complex float complex_src();
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-commits mailing list
>> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Saleem Abdulrasool
> compnerd (at) compnerd (dot) org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20141231/28224f05/attachment.html>