vitalybuka added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/CodeGen/lifetime2.c:78
break;
case 2:
bar(&x, 1);
----------------
vitalybuka wrote:
> StephenFan wrote:
> > vitalybuka wrote:
> > > vitalybuka wrote:
> > > > Please check for lifetime markers, I assume case 2 will have a new one
> > > > Please check for lifetime markers, I assume case 2 will have a new one
> > > Please check for *all* lifetime markers
> > >
> > > you can add use "FileCheck --implicit-check-not llvm.lifetime" so it will
> > > fail if something has no corresponding match
> > >
> > I have checked for all lifetime markers in `Diff 444701`. What's the point
> > of adding `--implicit-check-not llvm.lifetime`?
> Point is to have en error, if lifetime emitted, but we don't have a check for
> that.
> Which is very reasonable for the test.
actually converting the test into --implicit-check-not in a separate patch
could be nice, so we would be be confused by previously missed markers.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D129789
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D129448/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D129448
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
