[lldb-dev] Moving pexpect and unittest2 to lldb/third_party

Thu Oct 22 11:29:28 PDT 2015

We could also then remove unittest2 from inclusion in the lldb repo.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd be okay with that.
>
> The unittest2 stuff looks like it was a vestige of being incorporated
> before unittest2 was stock (unitest) on Python 2.[6,7]?.  Everyone should
> have a unitest included that is effectively what we use as unittest2.
>
> -Todd
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev <
> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> I plan to put this in today.  Greg, should I just go ahead and delete all
>> the unittest2 stuff entirely?  TBH I'm all for anything that reduces the
>> complexity of the test suite.  It's got a couple hundred options that
>> nobody uses, seems like we should start whittling away at stuff that
>> doesn't get any use.
>>
>> If you prefer I leave it in that's less work for me since I have that
>> patch ready to go, but TBH I'd rather remove it if that's ok.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:50 AM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> You can get pretty much the same effect though by just running dotest
>>> and passing it the folder that the .py file is in.   Then it only runs
>>> tests in that folder.  You can specify the filename too if you want to
>>> limit it to one name.  Sure, it's a few keystrokes less to just type
>>> TestMultithreaded.py or something, but given the extra complexity and the
>>> fact that it's running a totally different codepath, I wonder if the
>>> maintenance burden is worth it (I'm guessing no, since apparently it
>>> doesn't work well enough right now for anyone to use it)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:47 AM Greg Clayton <gclayton at apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I believe it would import lldb correctly. I don't tend to run the tests
>>>> individually, but if it did work, I would use it more.
>>>>
>>>> > On Oct 22, 2015, at 9:26 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev <
>>>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Todd, Greg, can you guys confirm this is true?   The import lldb
>>>> would succeed if someone had their PYTHONPATH set up just right, but if
>>>> really none of us care about it, I'm with Tamas in that I'd rather remove
>>>> it.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 2:55 AM Tamas Berghammer <
>>>> tberghammer at google.com> wrote:
>>>> > Hi Zach,
>>>> >
>>>> > I think nobody is using the "if __name__ == '__main__'" block as
>>>> executing a test file directly isn't working at the moment (the "import
>>>> lldb" command fails). If you plan to change all test file then I would
>>>> prefer to remove the reference to unittest2 from them for simplicity if
>>>> nobody have an objection against it.
>>>> >
>>>> > Tamas
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 8:57 PM Zachary Turner via lldb-dev <
>>>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>> > TL;DR - Nobody has to do anything, this is just a heads up that a
>>>> 400+ file CL is coming.
>>>> >
>>>> > IANAL, but I've been told by one that I need to move all third party
>>>> code used by LLDB to lldb/third_party.  Currently there is only one thing
>>>> there: the Python `six` module used for creating code that is portable
>>>> across Python 2 and Python 3.
>>>> >
>>>> > The only other 2 instances that I'm aware of are pexpect and
>>>> unittest2, which are under lldb/test.  I've got some patches locally which
>>>> move pexpect and unittest2 to lldb/third_party.  I'll hold off on checking
>>>> them in for a bit to give people a chance to see this message first,
>>>> because otherwise you might be surprised when you see a CL with 400 files
>>>> being checked in.
>>>> >
>>>> > Nobody will have to do anything after this CL goes in, and everything
>>>> should continue to work exactly as it currently does.
>>>> >
>>>> > The main reason for the churn is that pretty much every single test
>>>> in LLDB does something like this:
>>>> >
>>>> > import unittest2
>>>> >
>>>> > ...
>>>> >
>>>> > if __name__ == '__main__':
>>>> >     import atexit
>>>> >     lldb.SBDebugger.Initialize()
>>>> >     atexit.register(lambda: lldb.SBDebugger.Terminate())
>>>> >     unittest2.main()
>>>> >
>>>> > This worked when unittest2 was a subfolder of test, but not when it's
>>>> somewhere else.  Since LLDB's python code is not organized into a standard
>>>> python package and we treat the scripts like dotest etc as standalone
>>>> scripts, the way I've made this work is by introducing a module called
>>>> lldb_shared under test which, when you import it, fixes up sys.path to
>>>> correctly add all the right locations under lldb/third_party.
>>>> >
>>>> > So, every single test now needs a line at the top to import
>>>> lldb_shared.
>>>> >
>>>> > TBH I don't even know if we need this unittest2 stuff anymore (does
>>>> anyone even use it?)  but even if the answer is no, then that still means
>>>> changing every file to delete the import statement and the if __name__ ==
>>>> '__main__': block.
>>>> >
>>>> > If there are no major concerns I plan to check this in by the end of
>>>> the day, or tomorrow.
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > 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
>>>> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lldb-dev mailing list
>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -Todd
>

-- 
-Todd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20151022/3ae63c1a/attachment-0001.html>