[lldb-dev] LLDB Evolution

[Pavel Labath via lldb-dev]

I just committed another  header cleanup commit, which makes lldb
clang-format-immune ( = it still compiles after a full reformat) on
linux. Other OS's are still likely to have some missed dependencies.

However, when I tried running the test suite I got about 150 failures.
Based on a sample of the errors, it looks like the problem is that
clang format messes up the "// Place breakpoint here" annotations we
use in the tests.
Therefore, I propose to apply the clang-format to the lldb source code
only as a first step. After that, as a second step, we can go through
the tests and fix them up so that the comment markers are where we
expect them to be.

pl

On 11 August 2016 at 06:39, Chris Lattner via lldb-dev
<lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2016, at 8:42 AM, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> #2 could potentially be improved by lit style tests.
>
> +1 to this.
>
>> Again, the real question is just how much effort are we actually prepared to put into this?  I'd love it if there were entire days or weeks that were just testing weeks, where all we did was add new tests (or refactor code to make it more testable) and people didn't work on anything else.  I've been inactive for a while because I've had to prioritize work on some things in LLVM, but I could make time for something like that.
>
> I think it makes sense to start with the big mechanical changes and try to do it in a single “change the world” commit to avoid disrupting version control history too much.  After that is done, the many various refactorings (fixing dependence cycles, improving the testing situation to be more lit like, sinking functionality into LLVM and reusing existing LLVM functionality more, etc) can all be done in parallel and independently over time.
>
> -Chris
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev