On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 at 18:19, Leonard Mosescu <mose...@google.com> wrote:
>> the PDB tests under lit/SymbolFile/PDB need a linker to produce the program database > With this proposal, would we preserve any coverage for MSVC produced debug information? Well.. the question there is what are you trying to test? Is it the fact your debugger works with a particular compiler+linker combination (note that those tests already compile with clang-cl), or that your pdb-parsing code is sane. (integration vs. regression test). Historically we've only had the former kind of tests (dotest), and we've had the ability (and used it) to run those tests against different kinds of compilers. This is all nice, but it means that a specific test will be testing a different thing for every person who runs it. That's why I would like to build up a suite of more regression-like tests (*). I would say that the tests under lit/*** should be regression tests and our goal should be to remove as many system dependencies as possible, and leave the job of testing integration with a specific toolchain to "dotest" tests (**). Technically, the answer to your question is "no", because currently dotest tests don't know how to work with cl+link. Making that work would be an interesting project (although a bit annoying as the Makefiles are full of gcc-isms). However, I don't think that should stop us here. (*) Ideally I would like to leave even the compiler out of the equation for these tests, and make it so that the tests always run on the exact same set of bytes. I am hoping I will be able to write at least some tests using .s files. However, I don't think I will do that for all of them, because these files can be long/verbose/tedious to write. (**) However, even "dotest" tests should have a "default" mode which is as hermetic as possible. _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev