[PATCH] D98086: [FileCheck] Fix numeric error propagation

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

jdenny added inline comments.


================
Comment at: llvm/test/FileCheck/match-time-error-propagation/matched-excluded-pattern.txt:10-18
+; TODO: Capturing from an excluded pattern probably shouldn't be permitted
+; because it seems useless: it's captured only if the pattern matches, but then
+; FileCheck fails.  The helpfulness of reporting overflow from that capture is
+; perhaps questionable then, but it doesn't seem harmful either.  Anyway, the
+; goal of this test is simply to exercise the error propagation mechanism for a
+; matched excluded pattern.  In the future, if we have a more interesting error
+; to exercise in that case, we should instead use it in this test, and then we
----------------
jdenny wrote:
> thopre wrote:
> > FYI I'd like to make a patch to use APInt in FileCheck to allow numbers bigger than 64bits. I've found the need while working on __builtin_isnan for long double. No timeline and I don't expect to have time on it soon but that would remove the only post-match error unless a new one is added before that. On the other hand I haven't even started that work so I think this testcase should be kept.
> Thanks for mentioning it.  Inequality constraints will fit here, right?  If so, hopefully they'll come first so it's easy to maintain this handling.
Actually, based on the way `==` works, I suppose not.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D98086/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D98086