[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D52618: [Windows] A basic implementation of memory allocations in a debuggee process

Zachary Turner via lldb-commits lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Oct 1 05:55:56 PDT 2018

One idea would be to define some lit substitutions like %debuginfo. It’s
true you can produce a gcc style command line that will be equivalent to a
clang-cl invocation but it won’t be easy. eg you’ll needing to pass
-fms-compatibility as well as various -I for includes.

It may be easier to have substitutions instead
On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 4:54 AM Pavel Labath via Phabricator <
reviews at reviews.llvm.org> wrote:

> labath added inline comments.
> ================
> Comment at: lit/Expr/TestIRMemoryMapWindows.test:1-12
> +# REQUIRES: windows
> +
> +# RUN: clang-cl /Zi %p/Inputs/call-function.cpp -o %t
> +
> +# RUN: lldb-test ir-memory-map %t %S/Inputs/ir-memory-map-basic
> +# RUN: lldb-test ir-memory-map -host-only %t %S/Inputs/ir-memory-map-basic
> +
> ----------------
> The only difference in this test is the command line used to compile the
> inferior right? That sounds like something that we will run into for a lot
> of lit test, so I think it's important to work something our right away.
> Making a windows-flavoured copy of each test is not tractable.
> Is there a reason you have to use clang-cl here? I was under the
> impression that clang.exe worked fine on windows too (and used a
> gcc-compatible command line)...
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D52618
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/attachments/20181001/2b09aa85/attachment.html>

More information about the lldb-commits mailing list