[lldb-dev] lldb tests and tear down hooks

[Pavel Labath via lldb-dev]

On 14 January 2016 at 21:52, Zachary Turner via lldb-dev
<lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> So what if tests could be *either* a method *or* a nested class.  If it's a
> nested class, it could provide setUp, tearDown, and run methods.  These
> setup and teardown methods can do whatever they want specific to the
> individual test, and it also provides the exception safe way to clean up.

I don't think this is supported by unittest, which is what determines
what constitutes a "test". Nothing that couldn't be hacked around, but
I don't see the added value over just using a finally block.

Was there any reason we couldn't use that? I don't think it prevents
code reuse, and it's a standard way of doing things that everyone
should be familiar with.

pl