-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[llvm-c-test] Rename --test-dibuilder-debuginfo-format to --test-dibuilder
#105702
Conversation
ae1bd2a
to
ecccadb
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good catch! LGTM
@weliveindetail @OCHyams do you mind merging this one as well? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, good spot.
Looking at it though, I think the original name --test-dibuilder
from before all the renaming makes the most sense in today's state. I think we probably should've restored that name in the patch you linked - I probably just missed that at the time.
Could I be cheeky and ask that you invert your patch; change the flag name to --test-dibuilder
(keep the existing usage message) and update debug_info_new_format.ll
to use that flag?
ecccadb
to
af06013
Compare
--test-dibuilder
af06013
to
8dcc50d
Compare
@OCHyams done |
✅ With the latest revision this PR passed the C/C++ code formatter. |
…ibuilder` The former name was introduced during the split between debug info intrinsic and `DbgRecord`. Before the split, it was named `--test-dibuilder`. However, the full migration to `DbgRecord` happened already and we have just one test suite related to building debug info using LLVM-C API. Therefore, it makes sense to rename it back to `--test-dibuilder`.
8dcc50d
to
04325e1
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
…uilder` (llvm#105702) The former name was introduced during the split between debug info intrinsic and `DbgRecord`. Before the split, it was named `--test-dibuilder`. However, the full migration to `DbgRecord` happened already and we have just one test suite related to building debug info using LLVM-C API. Therefore, it makes sense to rename it back to `--test-dibuilder`.
…uilder` (llvm#105702) The former name was introduced during the split between debug info intrinsic and `DbgRecord`. Before the split, it was named `--test-dibuilder`. However, the full migration to `DbgRecord` happened already and we have just one test suite related to building debug info using LLVM-C API. Therefore, it makes sense to rename it back to `--test-dibuilder`.
The former name was introduced during the split between debug info intrinsic and
DbgRecord
. Before the split, it was named--test-dibuilder
.However, the full migration to
DbgRecord
happened already and we have just one test suite related to building debug info using LLVM-C API. Therefore, it makes sense to rename it back to--test-dibuilder
.