zturner added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32930#767820, @beanz wrote:

> One small comment below. In general I agree with the thoughts here, and I 
> think that this is a huge step forward for testing the debug server 
> components.
>
> I also agree with Zachary in principal that it would be nice to come up with 
> lit-based test harnesses for more parts of LLDB, although I'm skeptical about 
> whether or not that is actually the best way to test the debug server pieces. 
> Either way, this is a huge step forward from what we have today, so we should 
> go with it.


It would be nice if, at some point, we could move past "It's hard" and start 
getting into the details of what's hard about it.  (Note this goes for LLDB 
client as well as lldb server).  I see a lot of general hand-wavy comments 
about how conditionals are needed, or variables, etc, but that doesn't really 
do anything to convince me that it's hard.  After all, we wrote a C++ compiler! 
 And I'm pretty sure that the compiler-rt and sanitizer test suite is just as 
complicated as, if not more complicated than any hypothetical lldb test suite.  
And those have been solved.

What *would* help would be to ignore how difficult it may or may not be, and 
just take a couple of tests and re-write them in some DSL that you invent 
specifically for this purpose that is as concise as possible yet as expressive 
as you need, and we go from there.  I did this with a couple of fairly hairy 
tests a few months ago and it didn't seem that bad to me.

The thing is, the set of people who are experts on the client side of LLDB and 
the set of people who are experts on the client side of LLVM/lit/etc are mostly 
disjoint, so nothing is ever going to happen without some sort of 
collaboration.  For example, I'm more than willing to help out writing the lit 
bits of it, but I would need a specification of what the test language needs to 
look like to support all of the use cases.  And someone else has to provide 
that since we want to get the design right.  Even if implementing the language 
is hard, deciding what it needs to look like is supposed to be the easy part!


https://reviews.llvm.org/D32930



_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to