[lldb-dev] New test summary results formatter

[Todd Fiala via lldb-dev]

That seems reasonable. I'll work that in.

-Todd

> On Dec 3, 2015, at 4:55 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
> 
> It would also be nice if the summary statistics were printed after the list of failing / errored tests.  The reason is that it involves a fixed number of lines to print the table, but the list of failures and errors is a variable number of lines which could potentially be very long and push the statistics off the screen.
> 
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:08 AM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
>> Ahh I read further and see this was already mentioned by Pavel.
>> 
>>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:06 AM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:20 PM Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:44 PM Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> and the classname could be dropped (there's only one class per file anyway, so the classname is just wasted space)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Part of the reason I included that is I've hit several times where copy and paste errors lead to the same class name, method name or even file name being used for a test.  I think, though, that most of those are addressed by having the path (relative is fine) to the python test file.  I think we can probably get by with classname.methodname (relative test path).  (From your other email, I think you nuke the classname and keep the module name, but I'd probably do the reverse, keeping the class name and getting rid of the module name since it can be derived from the filename).
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don't think the filename can be the same anymore, as things will break if two filenames are the same.
>>>> 
>>>> Maybe, but that wasn't my experience as of fairly recently.  When tracking failures sometime within the last month, I tracked something down in a downstream branch with two same-named files that (with the legacy output) made it hard to track down what was actually failing given the limited info of the legacy test summary output.  Maybe that has changed since then, but I'm not aware of anything that would have prohibited that.
>>> 
>>> Well I only said "things" will break, not everything will break.  Most likely you just didn't notice the problem or it didn't present itself in your scenario.  There are definitely bugs surrounding multiple files with the same name, because of some places where we use a dictionary keyed on filename.
>>>  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20151203/d32b31de/attachment.html>