similar to: RFC: A cross platform way of using shell commands in lit tests

Hi R people, I have a very basic question to ask - I'm sorry if it's been asked before, but I searched the archives and could not find an answer. All the examples I found were much more complicated/nuanced versions of the problem - my question is much more simple. I have data with multiple, nested fixed effects (as I understand it, fixed effects are specified by the experimental design

Hi, I tried to use the 'make' file discussed in the last R-news. The step 'make R' dies with: make[2]: Entering directory `/home/laurent/these/R/RCrossBuild/WinR/R-1.7.1/src/gnuwin32' sed -e s/@RVER@/`cut -d' ' -f1 ../../VERSION | sed -n 1p`/g -e s/@RWVER@/rw1071/g rw-FAQ.texi | \ makeinfo --no-headers --number-sections -o rw-FAQ makeinfo --no-split --html

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 >>

I'm trying to put together some tests for the optimization bisecting feature I'm working on and I've come across a stumbling block trying to accomplish something in a lit test. I've got an IR file with some simple functions, one of which includes a call to another function that will be inlined during optimization. I can use this to manually test my new OptBisect class by invoking

It may be that the 'not' operator is not being found under bash at : 'RUN: at line 12';   not Perhaps this is would be better as the more commonly seen '!'. Neil Nelson On 9/13/19 12:12 PM, Neil Nelson via llvm-dev wrote: > > Toward the end of testing.9.0.0-rc4.log. > > Testing: 0 .. 10.. 20. > FAIL: Clang Tools :: clang-tidy/run-clang-tidy.cpp (17057 of

hi there, trying to follow the steps of Yan & Rossini 2003, I have two problems : first when I 'make CrossCompileBuild', I get : ****************************************************************************** make[1]: Entering directory `/home/ros/RWORK/CROSSSOMP/WinR/R-1.8.0/src/gnuwin32' make -f Makefile.docfiles make[2]: Entering directory

I'm using Windows 8.1, and every time I run check-clang, I eventually end up with a bunch of hung processes. Generally this is an instance of clang.exe, a bunch of instances of FileCheck.exe, and occasionally an llc.exe and an opt.exe. Inside, the processes are all hung inside of calls to WriteFile() attempting to write to stdout. I notice some of the tests fail with output indicating that

Hello LLVM community, For testing IR passes, LLVM currently has two kinds of tests: 1. regression tests (in llvm/test); .ll files invoking opt, and matching its text output using FileCheck. 2. unittests (in llvm/unittests); Google tests containing the IR as a string, constructing a pass pipeline, and inspecting the output using code. I propose to add an additional kind of test, which I call

Thanks! I'll get this posted on the web site. The "Performing Test ... failed to compile" failures from cmake are not interesting. But could you look in the log file and try to see what were the tests that failed in the "check-all" step? On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 4:39 PM Neil Nelson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Xubuntu/Ubuntu 19.04,

I'm a bit confused by this whole discussion. clang-format is neither mandated (by documentation) nor enforced (by any infrastructure/automation) for use in the LLVM project that I know of. It's convenient, and in review people may reasonably ask authors to consider running it, etc - but we have no system that requires or checks for that. Might be nice, might not be. It sounds like even

Hi everyone, I would like to start a discussion about enforcing use of clang-tidy (or better clang-tidy-diff) on patches before sending it to review. I like how clang-format simplified sending patches and reviews, e.g. "Use clang-format" instead of giving long list of lines that should be formatted by reviewer. I believe that clang-tidy can be also be very helpful here. Note that by

Hi, all, I am planning to add clang-tidy checkers for my company. How to add a new module for my company? Please help, thanks in advance. I try to copy files from cert module, and rename cert to Misra, then add a rule named "m-0-1-1" by ./add_new_checker.py. then I run ninja check-clang-tool, but my case is failed due to below error Running ['clang-tidy',

> -----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

Is there a way to do this with llvm-lit, i.e., use the equivalent of backticks? foo takes a single argument, but doesn't read from stdin. // RUN foo some_arg > %t; FileCheck %s < %t // RUN foo `cat %t` | FileCheck --check-prefix=INVERSE // CHECK: {{^[0-9]+$}} // INVERSE: some_arg thanks... don -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

I'm just wondering if anyone's using Ninja (which buffers output from subcommands, such as lit/FileCheck/etc) & has thought about/found a way to force FileCheck to use colour in spite of Ninja's buffering. Thanks, - David

Hi, A few tests seem broken for a long time, some for more than a month. Would it possible for respective owners to take a look please? I'm at checkout 133a7e631cee97965e310f0d110739217427fd3d, compiling on Windows 10. These tests fail with Visual Studio 2019: Failing Tests (7): Clang Tools :: clang-tidy/checkers/cert-mem57-cpp-cpp17.cpp Clang Tools ::

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}}

Johannes, This patch seems to be causing test failures when I just do "ninja check", without running "ninja" or "ninja all" first. $ CC=clang CXX=clang++ cmake -G Ninja ~/git/llvm-project/llvm -DLLVM_USE_LINKER=lld -DLLVM_PARALLEL_LINK_JOBS=4 -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DLLVM_TARGETS_TO_BUILD=X86 && ninja check [...] FAIL: LLVM ::

The upcoming C++1z (probably C++17) standard will not contain several things - most notably auto_ptr. Soon, libc++ will not be providing auto_ptr by default when building in C++1z mode. You'll be able to get it back with a "-D_LIBCPP_ENABLE_CXX17_REMOVED_AUTO_PTR" on your command line, or "#define _LIBCPP_ENABLE_CXX17_REMOVED_AUTO_PTR" before including any libc++ header