[llvm] [Coverage] Rework Decision/Expansion/Branch (PR #78969)
NAKAMURA Takumi via llvm-commits
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Jan 29 13:17:49 PST 2024
================
@@ -13,18 +13,18 @@
// CHECK-NEXT: |
// CHECK-NEXT: | Number of Conditions: 5
// CHECK-NEXT: | Condition C1 --> (9:7)
-// CHECK-NEXT: | Condition C2 --> (2:11)
-// CHECK-NEXT: | Condition C3 --> (3:11)
-// CHECK-NEXT: | Condition C4 --> (3:23)
-// CHECK-NEXT: | Condition C5 --> (9:22)
+// CHECK-NEXT: | Condition C2 --> (9:22)
+// CHECK-NEXT: | Condition C3 --> (2:11)
+// CHECK-NEXT: | Condition C4 --> (3:11)
+// CHECK-NEXT: | Condition C5 --> (3:23)
----------------
chapuni wrote:
Since I didn't think the order would be problematic with macro expansions, I took `push_back`. I guess this is similar behavior to the current implementation.
I could tweak the order to honor the location of `Expansion`. Your #78819 is better in this point. Is it better for me to rework?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/78969
More information about the llvm-commits
mailing list