EricWF created this revision. EricWF added reviewers: danalbert, jroelofs, mclow.lists. EricWF added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
The modified assertion fails when the test is compiled at various optimization levels. The value of `nothrow_traced` and `throw_traced` at various optimization levels are: * `-O0`: `nothrow_traced = 7`, `throw_traced = 7` * `-O1`: `nothrow_traced = 4`, `throw_traced = 5` * `-O2`: `nothrow_traced = 4`, `throw_traced = 4` * `-O3`: `nothrow_traced = 4`, `throw_traced = 4` I'm not sure exactly what this test is doing, so I would like somebody else to sign off on this change. https://reviews.llvm.org/D23524 Files: test/backtrace_test.pass.cpp Index: test/backtrace_test.pass.cpp =================================================================== --- test/backtrace_test.pass.cpp +++ test/backtrace_test.pass.cpp @@ -60,6 +60,6 @@ // Different platforms (and different runtimes) will unwind a different number // of times, so we can't make any better assumptions than this. assert(nothrow_ntraced > 1); - assert(throw_ntraced == nothrow_ntraced); // Make sure we unwind through catch + assert(throw_ntraced >= nothrow_ntraced); // Make sure we unwind through catch return 0; }
Index: test/backtrace_test.pass.cpp =================================================================== --- test/backtrace_test.pass.cpp +++ test/backtrace_test.pass.cpp @@ -60,6 +60,6 @@ // Different platforms (and different runtimes) will unwind a different number // of times, so we can't make any better assumptions than this. assert(nothrow_ntraced > 1); - assert(throw_ntraced == nothrow_ntraced); // Make sure we unwind through catch + assert(throw_ntraced >= nothrow_ntraced); // Make sure we unwind through catch return 0; }
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
