[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D16936: Remove expectedFailureWindows decorator

[Zachary Turner via lldb-commits]

zturner added a comment.

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D16936#347141, @labath wrote:

> I think this is getting way too complicated. I haven't seen any test
>  which needs such complicated combinations of skip conditions (and I
>  hope I never see one).


I agree that you don't need arbitrary complexity, but I think there are some things we would greatly benefit from.  For example, have you ever seen this?

  @expectedFailureWindows
  @expectedFailureGcc
  @expectedFailureHostLinux

That's 3 decorators, when you could write it as 1:

  @expectedFailure(or(oslist="windows", compiler="gcc", hostoslist="linux"))

The rest of the functionality I mentioned you practically get for free if you support this.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

http://reviews.llvm.org/D16936