MaskRay added a comment. In D121556#3444260 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121556#3444260>, @void wrote:
> In D121556#3444221 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121556#3444221>, @MaskRay wrote: > >> In D121556#3444131 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121556#3444131>, @void wrote: >> >>> In D121556#3444021 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D121556#3444021>, @MaskRay >>> wrote: >>> >>>> 7aa8c38a9e190aea14116028c38b1d9f54cbb0b3 >>>> <https://reviews.llvm.org/rG7aa8c38a9e190aea14116028c38b1d9f54cbb0b3> >>>> still uses `std::shuffle`, not incorporating the `llvm::shuffle` fixes I >>>> did. >>> >>> You said it was still failing after the std::shuffle to llvm::shuffle >>> change. >> >> By saying it still failed, I meant there were other Windows vs non-Windows >> differences, not that std::shuffle=>llvm::shuffle was an unintended change. > > So does it work or not? If I change it to `llvm::shuffle`, will the tests > fail or will they pass regardless of the platform? If you change `std::shuffle` to `llvm::shuffle` and add back tests like `EXPECT_EQ(Expected, getFieldNamesFromRecord(RD));`, the test will likely fail on Windows. I recall that @aaron.ballman uses Windows and may help you find the differences. I tend to agree with your `I think it's just a case where Windows' algorithm for std::mt19937 is subtly different than the one for Linux.` Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D121556/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D121556 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits