[PATCH] D96662: [lit] Add --skip (inverse of --filter) and `--xfail`

[Joel E. Denny via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

jdenny added a comment.

In D96662#2572321 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96662#2572321>, @yln wrote:

> `--skip`: is it okay if we rename this to `--filter-not`? It's an uglier name but

I like this suggestion for all the reasons @yln gave. However, I'd prefer --filter-out. It has the same advantages @yln gave, such as being obvious if you know what --filter does.  A small disadvantage is lack of grammatical symmetry. My issue is that --filter is not a clear name whereas --filter-in would've been clear.   Without that context, --filter-not is worse, in my opinion.  It sounds like "don't filter these tests", but isn't that the meaning of --filter?  --filter-out is clear in any context, in my opinion.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D96662/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D96662