HazardyKnusperkeks added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/TokenAnnotatorTest.cpp:820-833
+ ASSERT_EQ(BaseTokens.size(), NumberOfBaseTokens) << BaseTokens;
+ ASSERT_EQ(ConstrainedTokens.size(),
+ NumberOfBaseTokens + NumberOfAdditionalRequiresClauseTokens)
+ << ConstrainedTokens;
+
+ for (auto I = 0u; I < NumberOfBaseTokens; ++I) {
+ if (I < NumberOfTokensBeforeRequires) {
----------------
curdeius wrote:
> owenpan wrote:
> > Can you make it a function or lambda?
> :+1:
Often thought about that. But as @MyDeveloperDay mentioned in different other
reviews, we would loose the line where the EXPECT failed, since it would always
be the same line.
One step to mitigate that would be to return a `bool`, then one would loose the
"subexpect", only knows which subtest failed.
But an idea I have right now would be to add a StringRef parameter which is
then fed into the expect/assert to identify the subtest.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D129940/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D129940
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
