Summary:
One change: because there's no way to signal failure individually for
each cursor, we now "succeed" with an empty range with no parent if a
cursor doesn't point at anything.
Reviewers: usaxena95
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76741
Summary:
We already have a "Failed" matcher, which can be used to check any
property of the Error object. However, most frequently one just wants to
check the error message, and while this is possible with the "Failed"
matcher, it is also very convoluted
(Failed<ErrorInfoBase>(testing::Property(&ErrorInfoBase::message, "the
message"))).
Now, one can just write: FailedWithMessage("the message"). I expect that
most of the usages will remain this simple, but the argument of the
matcher is not limited to simple strings -- the argument of the matcher
can be any other matcher, so one can write more complicated assertions
if needed (FailedWithMessage(ContainsRegex("foo|bar"))). If one wants to
match multiple error messages, he can pass multiple arguments to the
matcher.
If one wants to match the message list as a whole (perhaps to check the
message count), I've also included a FailedWithMessageArray matcher,
which takes a single matcher receiving a vector of error message
strings.
Reviewers: sammccall, dblaikie, jhenderson
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74898
Summary:
Annotations allow writing nice-looking unit test code when one needs
access to locations from the source code, e.g. running code completion
at particular offsets in a file. See comments in Annotations.cpp for
more details on the API.
Also got rid of a duplicate annotations parsing code in clang's code
complete tests.
Reviewers: gribozavr, sammccall
Reviewed By: gribozavr
Subscribers: mgorny, hiraditya, ioeric, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, jdoerfert, cfe-commits, llvm-commits
Tags: #clang, #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59814
llvm-svn: 359179
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
libLLVMTestingSupport.so references a symbol in utils/unittest/UnitTestMain/TestMain.cpp (a layering issue) and will cause a link error because of -Wl,-z,defs (cmake/modules/HandleLLVMOptions.cmake)
Waiting zturner for a better fix.
llvm-svn: 341580
Occasionally it is useful to have unittest which take inputs.
While we normally try to have this test be more of a lit test
we occasionally don't have tools that can exercise the code
in the right way to test certain things. LLDB has been using
this style of unit test for a while, particularly with regards
to how it tests core dump and minidump file parsing. Recently
i needed this as well for the case where we want to test that
some of the PDB reading code works correctly. It needs to
exercise the code in a way that is not covered by any dumper
and would be impractical to implement in one of the dumpers,
but requires a valid PDB file. Since this is now needed by
more than one project, it makes sense to have this be a
generally supported thing that unit tests can do, and we just
encourage people to use this sparingly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D51561
llvm-svn: 341502
Failed<ErrorInfoBase>() did not compile, because it was attempting to
create a copy of the Error object when passing it to the nested matcher,
which was not possible because ErrorInfoBase is abstract.
This commit fixes the problem by making sure we pass the ErrorInfo
object by reference, which also improves the handling of non-abstract
objects, as we avoid potentially slicing an object during the copy.
llvm-svn: 329703
Summary:
The existing Failed() matcher only allowed asserting that the operation
failed, but it was not possible to verify any details of the returned
error.
This patch adds two new matchers, which make this possible:
- Failed<InfoT>() verifies that the operation failed with a single error
of a given type.
- Failed<InfoT>(M) additionally check that the contained error info
object is matched by the nested matcher M.
To make these work, I've changed the implementation of the ErrorHolder
class. Now, instead of just storing the string representation of the
Error, it fetches the ErrorInfo objects and stores then as a list of
shared pointers. This way, ErrorHolder remains copyable, while still
retaining the full information contained in the Error object.
In case the Error object contains two or more errors, the new matchers
will fail to match, instead of trying to match all (or any) of the
individual ErrorInfo objects. This seemed to be the most sensible
behavior for when one wants to match exact error details, but I could be
convinced otherwise...
Reviewers: zturner, lhames
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44925
llvm-svn: 329288
Summary:
This makes it possible to run an arbitrary matcher on the value
contained within the Expected<T> object.
To do this, I've needed to fully spell out the matcher, instead of using
the shorthand MATCHER_P macro.
The slight gotcha here is that standard template deduction will fail if
one tries to match HasValue(47) against an Expected<int &> -- the
workaround is to use HasValue(testing::Eq(47)).
The explanations produced by this matcher have changed a bit, since now
we delegate to the nested matcher to print the value. Since these don't
put quotes around the value, I've changed our PrintTo methods to match.
Reviewers: zturner
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41065
llvm-svn: 320561
Summary:
This did not work because the ExpectedHolder was trying to hold the
value in an Optional<T*>. Instead of trying to mimic the behavior of
Expected and try to make ExpectedHolder work with references and
non-references, I simply store the reference to the Expected object in
the holder.
I also add a bunch of tests for these matchers, which have helped me
flesh out some problems in my initial implementation of this patch, and
uncovered the fact that we are not consistent in quoting our values in
the matcher output (which I also fix).
Reviewers: zturner, chandlerc
Subscribers: mgorny, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40904
llvm-svn: 320025
Summary:
The const_cast in the "const" version of TakeExpected was quite
dangerous, as the function does indeed modify the apparently const
argument.
I assume the reason the const overload was added was to make the
function bind to xvalues(temporaries). That can be also achieved with
rvalue references, so I use that instead.
Using the ASSERT macros on const Expected objects will now become
illegal, but I believe that is correct, as it is not actually possible
to inspect the error stored in an Expected object without modifying it.
Reviewers: zturner, chandlerc
Subscribers: llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34405
llvm-svn: 306001
Many times unit tests for different libraries would like to use
the same helper functions for checking common types of errors.
This patch adds a common library with helpers for testing things
in Support, and introduces helpers in here for integrating the
llvm::Error and llvm::Expected<T> classes with gtest and gmock.
Normally, we would just be able to write:
EXPECT_THAT(someFunction(), succeeded());
but due to some quirks in llvm::Error's move semantics, gmock
doesn't make this easy, so two macros EXPECT_THAT_ERROR() and
EXPECT_THAT_EXPECTED() are introduced to gloss over the difficulties.
Consider this an exception, and possibly only temporary as we
look for ways to improve this.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33059
llvm-svn: 305395
