[LLVMdev] should we stop using llvm-as/llvm-dis in tests?

[Chris Lattner]

On Sep 5, 2009, at 1:53 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote:

> A recent commit added the ability to opt and llc to read .ll files
> directly. Should we go through and update the existing tests?

Yes, I think that Dan is planning to do this.

-Chris

>
>   llvm-as < %s | opt ... | llvm-dis
>
> would become:
>
>   opt %s ... -print-module
>
> and
>
>   llvm-as < %s | llc
>
> would become:
>
>   llc < %s
>
> The pro of this is that it would remove the bitcode write and read  
> from
> the tests, making them faster. The con of this is that it would remove
> the bitcode write and read from the tests, making them less well  
> tested.
>
> Should we not make this change at all? Should we create some sort of
> 'exhaustive bitcode tests' first, and require that new language  
> features
> are added there? Or should we just do it and create "llvm-as < %s |
> llvm-dis" tests under test/Bitcode as problems are found?
>
> Also, has anyone else already started doing this?
>
> Nick
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev