sammccall accepted this revision. sammccall added a comment. Thanks for fixing this, we don't want to depend on clang and I didn't realize we still did!
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/test/document-link.test:3 +# create a fake resource_dir so that the test can find the headers. +# RUN: mkdir -p %t/include/ && touch %t/include/foo.h +# RUN: clangd -lit-test -resource-dir=%t < %s | FileCheck -strict-whitespace %s ---------------- kadircet wrote: > this is clever! I believe there was a reason for this test to be asserting > built-in headers (I can't seem to remember, maybe @sammccall does), but > asserting through a mock header should also be fine, I suppose. > > one thing though, we need to clean up `%t`, e.g. `rm -rf %t`. > > (and regrading the failure at head, resource_dir path has changed with > release cut from `something/12.0.0` to `something/13.0.0` so it should go > away once you build new clang via `ninja clang`) > this is clever! Indeed, I almost wish we had a less-clever way to do this but I can't think of one :-) > I believe there was a reason for this test to be asserting built-in headers > (I can't seem to remember, maybe @sammccall does), but asserting through a > mock header should also be fine, I suppose. Nah, I think it was just to avoid complex setup (and builtin over stdlib as it's a somewhat less crazy dep). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D95670/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D95670 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
