search for: _optimal_

...it. But it seems to me that we have a huge pile of IR-level tests, so _somebody_ must think they are useful. :-) Sure, the acid test is whether the debugger does the right thing. I'm not saying debugger-based tests are worthless, I'm saying that _just_ having debugger-based tests is not _optimal_. DWARF-level testing would let you do things that debugger-based tests would find anywhere from awkward to impossible. That said, what's easiest is probably to get some form of GDB bot up and running, and the benefit is likely to be worth the pain. > AFAIK, most Dwarf compatible debuggers...

Full_Name: Antonio Possolo Version: 1.6.2 OS: Linux & Windows2000 Submission from: (NULL) (192.35.44.3) x <- as.POSIXct(strptime(c("1993-5-11", "1994-11-23", "1995-7-8", "1996-10-15"), format="%Y-%m-%d")) y <- c(15, 32, 47, 61) plot(x, y, xlab="Date", ylab="Count") Warns "parameter

On 18 October 2012 02:53, Robinson, Paul <Paul.Robinson at am.sony.com> wrote: > I had a "quality suite" at a previous job; it was the result of many PY > of effort. It was also debugger-based, which is a mixed blessing; you > get a lot of DWARF-parsing code for free, but then you get a lot of > debugger bugs for free too! And you don't get to test the DWARF >

Rick Foos wrote: > The error we are getting is: > “Undefined Form Value: 25” > ... > DW_FORM_flag_present caused the problem. The old DW_FORM_flag works for us. I see this error from GDB 7.0 but GDB 7.2 is okay with it. Now you know as much as I do. :-) Eric Christopher wrote: > [in reply to what Renato Golin wrote:] > > With time, you might get to a point where Dwarf is a

The PNaCl project has implemented various IR simplification passes that simplify LLVM IR by lowering complex features to simpler features. We'd like to upstream some of these IR passes to LLVM. We'd like to explore if this acceptable, and if so, how we should go about doing this. The immediate reason is that Emscripten is reusing PNaCl's IR passes for its new "fastcomp"