[lldb-dev] Auditing dotest's command line options
Zachary Turner via lldb-dev
lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Dec 7 09:43:17 PST 2015
I have updated the list of command line options with a proposed action. It
looks like exactly half of the command line options can be deleted, which
is going to be a huge win for being able to understand what the test suite
does and how to use it effectively. Please take a look at the updated
spreadsheet and make final comments. Last change to keep an option if I've
marked it as delete.
For a few of the ones people wrote that they use the option, but it seems
like the same functionality is provided by a different option. I marked
these as PREFER DELETE, but feel free to comment here if you still think it
should remain. I'll tackle those last and make sure there's consensus that
it's ok to delete them before doing so.
If there's no otehr comments, I plan to start working on this on Wednesday.
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 5:17 PM Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah that would be awesome, and also would be a lot of work. Good luck!
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev <
> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> Seems reasonable. I will make a best effort to get as many of them as I
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:34 AM Greg Clayton <gclayton at apple.com> wrote:
>>> Zach, I would also like to get rid of all global variables in the
>>> process of this change. The history goes like this: a long time ago someone
>>> wrote the initial dotest.py and parsed the options manually and stored
>>> results in global variables. Later, someone converted the options over to
>>> use a python library to parse the options, but we mostly copied the options
>>> from the options dictionary over into the globals and still use the globals
>>> all over the code. It would be great if we had at most one global variable
>>> that is something like "g_options" and anyone that was using any global
>>> variables will switch over to use the "g_options.XXXX" instead. Then we
>>> don't have to make copies and we can let the g_options contain all settings
>>> that are required.
>>> > On Nov 18, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev <
>>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>> > I would like to do a complete audit of dotest's command line options,
>>> find out who's using what, and then potentially delete anything that isn't
>>> being used. There's a mess of command line options in use, to the point
>>> that it's often hard to find free letters to use for new options.
>>> > I created this spreadsheet with a complete list of command line
>>> options, their descriptions, and a place for people to enter what options
>>> they're using or do not want to be deleted.
>>> > If someone has already written YES in the box that indicates they need
>>> the option, please don't overwrite it. If you write YES in a box, please
>>> provide at least a small rationale for why this option is useful to you.
>>> Feel free to add additional rationale if someone has already added some
>>> > I'm going to have a couple days in mid-December and do this cleanup,
>>> so I'd like to get a solid picture of what options are not needed before
>>> then. After people have had some time to look over this, I'll go through
>>> the results and decide what to do with each one, and then send out another
>>> email with a proposed action column for each command line option.
>>> > Please do take the time to have a look at this, because any option
>>> that doesn't have a YES in it after a couple of weeks I'm going to assume
>>> is a candidate for deletion.
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > lldb-dev mailing list
>>> > lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>> lldb-dev mailing list
>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the lldb-dev