[PATCH] D43233: Use EXPECT_FALSE instead of EXPECT_EQ(false, ...

[Momchil Velikov via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

chill created this revision.
chill added a reviewer: gkistanova.

Commit https://reviews.llvm.org/rL324489 added

  EXPECT_EQ(false, N->isUnsigned());

which older GCC versions dislike for some reason. Anyway, it looks like the proper GTest way
is to use `EXPECT_FALSE`, etc.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D43233

Files:
  unittests/IR/MetadataTest.cpp


Index: unittests/IR/MetadataTest.cpp
===================================================================
--- unittests/IR/MetadataTest.cpp
+++ unittests/IR/MetadataTest.cpp
@@ -981,7 +981,7 @@
   auto *N = DIEnumerator::get(Context, 7, false, "name");
   EXPECT_EQ(dwarf::DW_TAG_enumerator, N->getTag());
   EXPECT_EQ(7, N->getValue());
-  EXPECT_EQ(false, N->isUnsigned());
+  EXPECT_FALSE(N->isUnsigned());
   EXPECT_EQ("name", N->getName());
   EXPECT_EQ(N, DIEnumerator::get(Context, 7, false, "name"));
 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: D43233.134027.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 510 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20180213/e1f7326a/attachment.bin>