Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "bfilecheck".
Did you mean:
filecheck
2017 Jul 07
2
Swallowing of input in FileCheck
...k failures is easy, you just copy-paste the command like you said and pipe it to less. It's only a pain when you aren't sure if a failure on a bot will reproduce locally. So, I would be in favor of an option to lit that we enable on buildslaves that dumps the output. We already have a '\bFileCheck\b' substitution in lit. We'd just expand it to 'FileCheck --dump-on-failure' or something on bots.
This sounds reasonable to me, no matter what on the above question.
- Daniel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.o...
2017 Jul 07
2
Swallowing of input in FileCheck
Hi,
Debugging tests which make use of FileCheck can be a frustrating experience, as all input will be swallowed (even with -v flag passed to lit),
and one would often need to copy-and-paste and rerun the failing command manually without piping into FileCheck.
Initially I’ve assumed that this is done due to stream processing, but looking at FileCheck source code I can see that
it actually gets the
2017 Jul 08
3
Swallowing of input in FileCheck
...> you just copy-paste the command like you said and pipe it to less. It's
> only a pain when you aren't sure if a failure on a bot will reproduce
> locally. So, I would be in favor of an option to lit that we enable on
> buildslaves that dumps the output. We already have a '\bFileCheck\b'
> substitution in lit. We'd just expand it to 'FileCheck --dump-on-failure'
> or something on bots.
>
>
> This sounds reasonable to me, no matter what on the above question.
>
> - Daniel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLV...
2017 Jul 08
2
Swallowing of input in FileCheck
...t copy-paste the command like you said and pipe it to less. It's
>> only a pain when you aren't sure if a failure on a bot will reproduce
>> locally. So, I would be in favor of an option to lit that we enable on
>> buildslaves that dumps the output. We already have a '\bFileCheck\b'
>> substitution in lit. We'd just expand it to 'FileCheck --dump-on-failure'
>> or something on bots.
>>
>>
>> This sounds reasonable to me, no matter what on the above question.
>>
>> - Daniel
>>
>>
>> ________________...