> On Apr 6, 2018, at 2:07 AM, Pavel Labath via Phabricator > <revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote: > > labath added inline comments. > > > ================ > Comment at: packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/settings/TestSettings.py:544-545 > + # the actual name and via .experimental. > + cmdinterp.HandleCommand("settings set target.arg0 first-value", > result) > + self.assertEqual(result.Succeeded(), True) > + cmdinterp.HandleCommand("settings show target.arg0", result) > ---------------- > Isn't this basically what `self.expect` would do (only with better logging > and error messages)?
Ah, I didn't see that self.expect would allow me to specify whether to expect an error return or not. Yes I can write this in terms of self.expect more cleanly. BTW what does the documentation for self.expect in lldbtest.py mean when it refers to "golden input"? It uses the phrase a few times and I can't figure out what it's talking about. Maybe that term was in the documentation from long ago and not a recent addition. > > > ================ > Comment at: source/Interpreter/OptionValueProperties.cpp:210-215 > + llvm::SmallVector<llvm::StringRef, 8> components; > + name.split(components, '.'); > + bool name_contains_experimental = false; > + for (const auto &part : components) > + if (Properties::IsSettingExperimental(part)) > + name_contains_experimental = true; > ---------------- > Not a big deal, but I would expect that the magicness of `experimental` would > kick in only for the components which are come after `experimental` keyword. > So something like `target.experimental.non-existant-setting` should be > subject to the magic behavior, but > `target.non-existant-setting.experimental.foo` should not (?) Yeah, I was debating whether to do it properly like that or not. The GetSubValue() method is recursive and would need a new bool &is_experimental argument, but it would need to be initialized to false before GetSubValue was called, or GetSubValue would need to be renamed to GetSubValueImpl and a GetSubValue function that initializes it to false and then calls GetSubValueImpl would need to be done. It's not terrible, but I couldn't make up my mind if it was worth the trouble to correctly error out on target.non-existant-setting.experimental.foo or not. _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits