probinson added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines-pro-type-vararg-ms.cpp:7 + +// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s cppcoreguidelines-pro-type-vararg %t + ---------------- probinson wrote: > TWeaver wrote: > > njames93 wrote: > > > TWeaver wrote: > > > > Is the missing FileCheck call here on purpose? it seems to me that the > > > > CHECK-MESSAGES aren't actually being verified by this test? > > > > > > > > unless I'm missing something. > > > > > > > > TIA > > > `check_clang_tidy` invokes FileCheck. Does something else make you think > > > these labels are being tested?? > > whilst investigating an unrelated issue on our internal branch, I tried > > editting the check lines in this test and wasn't able to create a failure. > > but if I add > > > > '| FileCheck %s -check-prefix=CHECK-MESSAGES' to the run line and then edit > > the checks, I can induce an error. > > > > This could be an issue on our internal branch though... :shrug: thanks for > > the speedy reply. > I'm suspicious that our downstream problem is because the test is assuming > that the target is Windows, just because the host is. That's not true for us > (or anyone with a Windows-hosted cross-compiler). Does clang-tidy accept a > target triple? Or possibly the test could be set up to require a Windows target, rather than a Windows host. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D101259/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D101259 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
