search for: runtiume

Sorry for the slow replies. I'm out on vacation this week. Alexey wrote: > If you want to test the sanitizer runtiume library "during development", > you should verify that it works with the Clang at hand. I want to test an implementation of libraries, not that clang links a library in its install directory. We only need one clang test for the latter (not 100) and that test already exists in the cla...

...amsonov at google.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Sorry for the slow replies. I'm out on vacation this week. >> >> >> Alexey wrote: >> > If you want to test the sanitizer runtiume library "during development", >> > you should verify that it works with the Clang at hand. >> >> I want to test an implementation of libraries, not that clang links a >> library in its install directory. We only need one clang test for the >> latter (not...

> We considered adding "%run" to all binary invocations, > but dropped this idea. I don't remember the details, but IIRC %run is > just not general enough. IMHO this is where simplicity of lit approach starts to fail - important information (environment variables, dependent shared libs, expected test status, etc.) is buried inside arbitrarily complex runstrings. -Y

> First of all, sorry for the late response (I'm in the process of moving to California). Welcome! > We need to verify that simple command "clang -fsanitize=address foo.cc" works Agreed. The test suite is useful in many different scenarios: 1) Verifying the integrated clang. 2) Verifying the integrated gcc. 3) Verifying the libraries during development. I'm working