[llvm-dev] [RFC] Improving FileCheck
Joel E. Denny via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Sat Apr 18 12:14:24 PDT 2020
On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 1:58 PM Jon Roelofs <jroelofs at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:03 PM Joel E. Denny <jdenny.ornl at gmail.com>
>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 1:16 PM Jon Roelofs via llvm-dev <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> All of these are variants in some form or another of comments that contain
>>> the check prefix, but which are intentionally not actual CHECK lines.
>> Thanks for working on this. That report makes me think the diagnostic is
>> going to be frustrating. What do you think?
> This seems small compared to the number of tests, and even smaller
> compared to the number of total lines of test. It's also small compared to
> the number of true positives it has found.
> These cases can all be easily reworded to avoid the new diagnostic, and we
> could even add the preferred spelling to avoid it in the diagnostic
> itself, i.e. "if you want to avoid this, surround with backticks" (or
> whatever we decide on).
> IMO, that makes it worthwhile even despite a little discomfort.
OK. You've been looking at it more than I have.
Which of the heuristic proposals are you testing with now?
Any interest in introducing a FileCheck comment syntax? Maybe the regex is
'\bRUN:|\bCOM:'? "COM:" would likely be clearer than directive name
mangling, either when "fixing" comments for this diagnostic or when just
trying to disable a directive for debugging, etc.
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev