On Friday, August 31, 2012, Chandler Carruth wrote: > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Daniel Dunbar > <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');> > > wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 12:23 PM, David Blaikie >> <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');>> >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Daniel Dunbar >> > <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');>> >> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:23 AM, David Blaikie >> >> <[email protected]<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', '[email protected]');>> >> wrote: >> >>> Daniel (& anyone else), >> >>> >> >>> Do you know if the documentation here ( >> >>> http://llvm.org/docs/TestingGuide.html#rtcustom / >> >>> >> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/llvm/trunk/docs/TestingGuide.html?view=diff&r1=36059&r2=36060 >> >>> ) is still valid? It doesn't appear to be, since my change below >> >>> doesn't do particularly interesting quoting/escaping gymnastics & >> >>> seems to work fine. >> >>> >> >>> Any ideas? Should we update the documentation? Does anyone know >> >>> what/when/how/why this changed? >> >> >> >> What is actually going on here is that the LLVM test suite and the >> >> Clang test suite use a different style of test. >> >> >> >> The LLVM test suite is technically written using Tcl syntax, and the >> >> Clang test suite uses shell syntax. The document in question is >> >> referring to the LLVM test suite. >> >> >> >> The fact that the test suites use different styles is an unfortunate >> >> and poorly documented historical accident. Ideally we would kill off >> >> the Tcl style and only use the shell style. >> > >> > I see - I think I'd heard some of that in various discussions. Where >> > is the option for shell V tcl specified? >> >> The top level lit.cfg specifies the "test format", e.g.: >> config.test_format = lit.formats.ShTest(execute_external) >> >> Actually, apparently I lied the LLVM suite has moved over to the Sh >> style tests and I never noticed: >> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=rev&revision=159525 >> >> So in fact the document in question is completely out of date. >> > > Sorry for missing the documentation... > > >> >> > >> >> Also, what is a "lesser lit-like" test runner? >> > >> > In this case, it's a shell script that attempts to transform RUN lines >> > into a shell script to run a lit test - it works for the basic cases. >> >> Dare I ask why you would do this instead of just running lit? > > > We run the tests in a distributed fashion, one test per worker, and the > start-up overhead of python combined with the lit stuff takes more time > than most of the test cases by a factor of 10 to 1000. ;] The shell script > starts up very very fast. >
Makes sense. What if lit had a mode to generate all the scripts and then you just farmed them out? That would avoid having to duplicate any of the script parsing code. - Daniel
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
