search for: filechecking

On Jan 16, 2013, at 1:19 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >> I agree that a command line option would be better. But in that case >> all tests should be updated. It is not an issue for me -- it is >> mostly mechanical. So should I change tests to use %FileCheck? > > Here's a third attempt. Thanks in advance for driving this forward.

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > On Jan 16, 2013, at 1:19 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >>> I agree that a command line option would be better. But in that case >>> all tests should be updated. It is not an issue for me -- it is >>> mostly mechanical. So should I change tests to use

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > We have to options: > (a) replace 'FileCheck' with '%FileCheck' in all tests, and teach > 'lit' to replace '%FileCheck' with 'FileCheck --dump-input-on-error'; > > (b) teach 'lit' to replace a plain 'FileCheck'. > > The first approach

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> When someone breaks a FileCheck-based test on some buildbot, sometimes >> it may not be obvious *why* did it fail. If the failure can not be >> reproduced locally, it can

On Jan 17, 2013, at 10:30 AM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Jan 17, 2013, at 9:57 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: >>>> On Thu,

Hello, When someone breaks a FileCheck-based test on some buildbot, sometimes it may not be obvious *why* did it fail. If the failure can not be reproduced locally, it can be very hard to fix. I propose adding a "very verbose" mode to FileCheck. In this mode FileCheck will dump the input file in case of failure. This mode will be enabled by an environment variable

On Jan 17, 2013, at 9:57 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >>> We have to options: >>> (a) replace 'FileCheck' with '%FileCheck' in all tests, and teach

> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom de Vries [mailto:Tom_deVries at mentor.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 2:31 AM > To: Robinson, Paul > Cc: Jonathan Roelofs; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [FileCheck] Fix --strict-whitespace --match-full- > lines > > On 14/12/16 18:48, Robinson, Paul wrote: > > Please send patches to

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> When someone breaks a FileCheck-based test on some buildbot,

Hello I have pass operating on bitcode file which produces more than one equivalent representation. opt --my-pass <%s | Filecheck %s --my-pass generates files a.rpt b.rpt c.rpt . How do i write test without writing all 3 files to stdin. I have considered CHECK-LABEL for each. it creates bulky checks. Thanks Mahesh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

On 14/12/16 18:48, Robinson, Paul wrote: > Please send patches to llvm-commits not llvm-dev. > > Writing FileCheck tests has pitfalls. A test along these lines: > > bla0 > CHECK:bla1 > > will actually pass, because the CHECK pattern is also part of the input > so it will readily match itself. You want the CHECK lines not to match > themselves, which you can easily do

Please send patches to llvm-commits not llvm-dev. Writing FileCheck tests has pitfalls. A test along these lines: bla0 CHECK:bla1 will actually pass, because the CHECK pattern is also part of the input so it will readily match itself. You want the CHECK lines not to match themselves, which you can easily do by introducing {{}} into the (middle of the) pattern. That is: bla0 CHECK:{{bla1}}

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jan 17, 2013, at 9:57 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> We have to

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: > > On Jan 17, 2013, at 10:30 AM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 17, 2013, at 9:57 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >>>

Hi all, Some discussions and comments were made in reviews. Much time has already passed since last comment and uploading changed patches. I made small summary report about features here, because there are some doubts about syntax of some features and changes in patches and it'll be great to know more opinions. 1. FileCheck Enhancement - CHECK-WORD (https://reviews.llvm.org/D22353) I replace

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >>>

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: >> We have to options: >> (a) replace 'FileCheck' with '%FileCheck' in all tests, and teach >> 'lit' to replace '%FileCheck' with 'FileCheck --dump-input-on-error';

Hi, this patch fixes a problem with leading/trailing whitespace matching for FileCheck --strict-whitespace --match-full-lines. Consider a text file: ... $ cat DUMP bla1 bla2 bla3 bla4 bla5 ... with some leading and trailing spaces, made more visible like this: ... $ sed 's/ /_/g' DUMP bla1 bla2 _bla3 bla4_ _bla5_ ... and a FileCheck file CHECK to match DUMP: ... $ cat CHECK //

On 15/12/16 17:51, Robinson, Paul wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Tom de Vries [mailto:Tom_deVries at mentor.com] >> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2016 2:31 AM >> To: Robinson, Paul >> Cc: Jonathan Roelofs; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [FileCheck] Fix --strict-whitespace --match-full- >> lines >>

On Jan 16, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > When someone breaks a FileCheck-based test on some buildbot, sometimes > it may not be obvious *why* did it fail. If the failure can not be > reproduced locally, it can be very hard to fix. > > I propose adding a "very verbose" mode to FileCheck. In this mode >