#
1.8 |
|
02-Aug-2023 |
rillig |
lint: distinguish between arguments and parameters
|
#
1.7 |
|
09-Jul-2023 |
rillig |
lint: clean up the wording of a few diagnostics
|
#
1.6 |
|
28-Mar-2023 |
rillig |
lint: warn about extern declarations outside headers
https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-userlevel/2023/03/15/msg013727.html
|
Revision tags: netbsd-10-base
|
#
1.5 |
|
22-Jun-2022 |
rillig |
lint: add quotes around placeholders for the remaining messages
Reword some of the messages slightly, exchanging brevity for clarity.
Message 138 is kept as-is, as it is not yet covered by any tests.
Message 240 is kep as-is, as it is unreachable.
|
#
1.4 |
|
17-Jun-2022 |
rillig |
tests/lint: make 'expect+-' comments stricter
Previously, the expectations from these comments were already satisfied if the expectation occurred somewhere in the actual message from lint. This meant that the prefix 'error:' or 'warning:' could be omitted from the 'expect' comment. These omissions were hard to see in a manual review. Now any omissions must be visually marked with '...'.
The test msg_342 now reports its messages properly as being in the file msg_342.c, rather than msg_341.c. This had been a copy-and-paste mistake.
|
#
1.3 |
|
27-Aug-2021 |
rillig |
tests/lint: test some more messages
|
Revision tags: cjep_sun2x-base1 cjep_sun2x-base cjep_staticlib_x-base1 cjep_staticlib_x-base
|
#
1.2 |
|
21-Feb-2021 |
rillig |
lint: force each test to declare the expected diagnostics
By listing the expected diagnostics directly at the code that triggers the diagnostics, it is easier to cross-check whether the diagnostics make sense.
No functional change to lint itself.
|
#
1.1 |
|
02-Jan-2021 |
rillig |
lint: add a test for each message produced by lint1
Having a test for each message ensures that upcoming refactorings don't break the basic functionality. Adding the tests will also discover previously unknown bugs in lint.
The tests ensure that every lint message can actually be triggered, and they demonstrate how to do so. Having a separate file for each test leaves enough space for documenting historical anecdotes, rationale or edge cases, keeping them away from the source code.
The interesting details of this commit are in Makefile and t_integration.sh. All other files are just auto-generated.
When running the tests as part of ATF, they are packed together as a single test case. Conceptually, it would have been better to have each test as a separate test case, but ATF quickly becomes very slow as soon as a test program defines too many test cases, and 50 is already too many. The time complexity is O(n^2), not O(n) as one would expect. It's the same problem as in tests/usr.bin/make, which has over 300 test cases as well.
|
#
1.7 |
|
09-Jul-2023 |
rillig |
lint: clean up the wording of a few diagnostics
|
#
1.6 |
|
28-Mar-2023 |
rillig |
lint: warn about extern declarations outside headers
https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-userlevel/2023/03/15/msg013727.html
|
Revision tags: netbsd-10-base
|
#
1.5 |
|
22-Jun-2022 |
rillig |
lint: add quotes around placeholders for the remaining messages
Reword some of the messages slightly, exchanging brevity for clarity.
Message 138 is kept as-is, as it is not yet covered by any tests.
Message 240 is kep as-is, as it is unreachable.
|
#
1.4 |
|
17-Jun-2022 |
rillig |
tests/lint: make 'expect+-' comments stricter
Previously, the expectations from these comments were already satisfied if the expectation occurred somewhere in the actual message from lint. This meant that the prefix 'error:' or 'warning:' could be omitted from the 'expect' comment. These omissions were hard to see in a manual review. Now any omissions must be visually marked with '...'.
The test msg_342 now reports its messages properly as being in the file msg_342.c, rather than msg_341.c. This had been a copy-and-paste mistake.
|
#
1.3 |
|
27-Aug-2021 |
rillig |
tests/lint: test some more messages
|
Revision tags: cjep_sun2x-base1 cjep_sun2x-base cjep_staticlib_x-base1 cjep_staticlib_x-base
|
#
1.2 |
|
21-Feb-2021 |
rillig |
lint: force each test to declare the expected diagnostics
By listing the expected diagnostics directly at the code that triggers the diagnostics, it is easier to cross-check whether the diagnostics make sense.
No functional change to lint itself.
|
#
1.1 |
|
02-Jan-2021 |
rillig |
lint: add a test for each message produced by lint1
Having a test for each message ensures that upcoming refactorings don't break the basic functionality. Adding the tests will also discover previously unknown bugs in lint.
The tests ensure that every lint message can actually be triggered, and they demonstrate how to do so. Having a separate file for each test leaves enough space for documenting historical anecdotes, rationale or edge cases, keeping them away from the source code.
The interesting details of this commit are in Makefile and t_integration.sh. All other files are just auto-generated.
When running the tests as part of ATF, they are packed together as a single test case. Conceptually, it would have been better to have each test as a separate test case, but ATF quickly becomes very slow as soon as a test program defines too many test cases, and 50 is already too many. The time complexity is O(n^2), not O(n) as one would expect. It's the same problem as in tests/usr.bin/make, which has over 300 test cases as well.
|
#
1.6 |
|
28-Mar-2023 |
rillig |
lint: warn about extern declarations outside headers
https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-userlevel/2023/03/15/msg013727.html
|
Revision tags: netbsd-10-base
|
#
1.5 |
|
22-Jun-2022 |
rillig |
lint: add quotes around placeholders for the remaining messages
Reword some of the messages slightly, exchanging brevity for clarity.
Message 138 is kept as-is, as it is not yet covered by any tests.
Message 240 is kep as-is, as it is unreachable.
|
#
1.4 |
|
17-Jun-2022 |
rillig |
tests/lint: make 'expect+-' comments stricter
Previously, the expectations from these comments were already satisfied if the expectation occurred somewhere in the actual message from lint. This meant that the prefix 'error:' or 'warning:' could be omitted from the 'expect' comment. These omissions were hard to see in a manual review. Now any omissions must be visually marked with '...'.
The test msg_342 now reports its messages properly as being in the file msg_342.c, rather than msg_341.c. This had been a copy-and-paste mistake.
|
#
1.3 |
|
27-Aug-2021 |
rillig |
tests/lint: test some more messages
|
Revision tags: cjep_sun2x-base1 cjep_sun2x-base cjep_staticlib_x-base1 cjep_staticlib_x-base
|
#
1.2 |
|
21-Feb-2021 |
rillig |
lint: force each test to declare the expected diagnostics
By listing the expected diagnostics directly at the code that triggers the diagnostics, it is easier to cross-check whether the diagnostics make sense.
No functional change to lint itself.
|
#
1.1 |
|
02-Jan-2021 |
rillig |
lint: add a test for each message produced by lint1
Having a test for each message ensures that upcoming refactorings don't break the basic functionality. Adding the tests will also discover previously unknown bugs in lint.
The tests ensure that every lint message can actually be triggered, and they demonstrate how to do so. Having a separate file for each test leaves enough space for documenting historical anecdotes, rationale or edge cases, keeping them away from the source code.
The interesting details of this commit are in Makefile and t_integration.sh. All other files are just auto-generated.
When running the tests as part of ATF, they are packed together as a single test case. Conceptually, it would have been better to have each test as a separate test case, but ATF quickly becomes very slow as soon as a test program defines too many test cases, and 50 is already too many. The time complexity is O(n^2), not O(n) as one would expect. It's the same problem as in tests/usr.bin/make, which has over 300 test cases as well.
|
#
1.5 |
|
22-Jun-2022 |
rillig |
lint: add quotes around placeholders for the remaining messages
Reword some of the messages slightly, exchanging brevity for clarity.
Message 138 is kept as-is, as it is not yet covered by any tests.
Message 240 is kep as-is, as it is unreachable.
|
#
1.4 |
|
17-Jun-2022 |
rillig |
tests/lint: make 'expect+-' comments stricter
Previously, the expectations from these comments were already satisfied if the expectation occurred somewhere in the actual message from lint. This meant that the prefix 'error:' or 'warning:' could be omitted from the 'expect' comment. These omissions were hard to see in a manual review. Now any omissions must be visually marked with '...'.
The test msg_342 now reports its messages properly as being in the file msg_342.c, rather than msg_341.c. This had been a copy-and-paste mistake.
|
#
1.3 |
|
27-Aug-2021 |
rillig |
tests/lint: test some more messages
|
Revision tags: cjep_sun2x-base1 cjep_sun2x-base cjep_staticlib_x-base1 cjep_staticlib_x-base
|
#
1.2 |
|
21-Feb-2021 |
rillig |
lint: force each test to declare the expected diagnostics
By listing the expected diagnostics directly at the code that triggers the diagnostics, it is easier to cross-check whether the diagnostics make sense.
No functional change to lint itself.
|
#
1.1 |
|
02-Jan-2021 |
rillig |
lint: add a test for each message produced by lint1
Having a test for each message ensures that upcoming refactorings don't break the basic functionality. Adding the tests will also discover previously unknown bugs in lint.
The tests ensure that every lint message can actually be triggered, and they demonstrate how to do so. Having a separate file for each test leaves enough space for documenting historical anecdotes, rationale or edge cases, keeping them away from the source code.
The interesting details of this commit are in Makefile and t_integration.sh. All other files are just auto-generated.
When running the tests as part of ATF, they are packed together as a single test case. Conceptually, it would have been better to have each test as a separate test case, but ATF quickly becomes very slow as soon as a test program defines too many test cases, and 50 is already too many. The time complexity is O(n^2), not O(n) as one would expect. It's the same problem as in tests/usr.bin/make, which has over 300 test cases as well.
|
#
1.4 |
|
17-Jun-2022 |
rillig |
tests/lint: make 'expect+-' comments stricter
Previously, the expectations from these comments were already satisfied if the expectation occurred somewhere in the actual message from lint. This meant that the prefix 'error:' or 'warning:' could be omitted from the 'expect' comment. These omissions were hard to see in a manual review. Now any omissions must be visually marked with '...'.
The test msg_342 now reports its messages properly as being in the file msg_342.c, rather than msg_341.c. This had been a copy-and-paste mistake.
|
#
1.3 |
|
27-Aug-2021 |
rillig |
tests/lint: test some more messages
|
Revision tags: cjep_sun2x-base1 cjep_sun2x-base cjep_staticlib_x-base1 cjep_staticlib_x-base
|
#
1.2 |
|
21-Feb-2021 |
rillig |
lint: force each test to declare the expected diagnostics
By listing the expected diagnostics directly at the code that triggers the diagnostics, it is easier to cross-check whether the diagnostics make sense.
No functional change to lint itself.
|
#
1.1 |
|
02-Jan-2021 |
rillig |
lint: add a test for each message produced by lint1
Having a test for each message ensures that upcoming refactorings don't break the basic functionality. Adding the tests will also discover previously unknown bugs in lint.
The tests ensure that every lint message can actually be triggered, and they demonstrate how to do so. Having a separate file for each test leaves enough space for documenting historical anecdotes, rationale or edge cases, keeping them away from the source code.
The interesting details of this commit are in Makefile and t_integration.sh. All other files are just auto-generated.
When running the tests as part of ATF, they are packed together as a single test case. Conceptually, it would have been better to have each test as a separate test case, but ATF quickly becomes very slow as soon as a test program defines too many test cases, and 50 is already too many. The time complexity is O(n^2), not O(n) as one would expect. It's the same problem as in tests/usr.bin/make, which has over 300 test cases as well.
|
#
1.3 |
|
27-Aug-2021 |
rillig |
tests/lint: test some more messages
|
Revision tags: cjep_sun2x-base1 cjep_sun2x-base cjep_staticlib_x-base1 cjep_staticlib_x-base
|
#
1.2 |
|
21-Feb-2021 |
rillig |
lint: force each test to declare the expected diagnostics
By listing the expected diagnostics directly at the code that triggers the diagnostics, it is easier to cross-check whether the diagnostics make sense.
No functional change to lint itself.
|
#
1.1 |
|
02-Jan-2021 |
rillig |
lint: add a test for each message produced by lint1
Having a test for each message ensures that upcoming refactorings don't break the basic functionality. Adding the tests will also discover previously unknown bugs in lint.
The tests ensure that every lint message can actually be triggered, and they demonstrate how to do so. Having a separate file for each test leaves enough space for documenting historical anecdotes, rationale or edge cases, keeping them away from the source code.
The interesting details of this commit are in Makefile and t_integration.sh. All other files are just auto-generated.
When running the tests as part of ATF, they are packed together as a single test case. Conceptually, it would have been better to have each test as a separate test case, but ATF quickly becomes very slow as soon as a test program defines too many test cases, and 50 is already too many. The time complexity is O(n^2), not O(n) as one would expect. It's the same problem as in tests/usr.bin/make, which has over 300 test cases as well.
|
#
1.2 |
|
21-Feb-2021 |
rillig |
lint: force each test to declare the expected diagnostics
By listing the expected diagnostics directly at the code that triggers the diagnostics, it is easier to cross-check whether the diagnostics make sense.
No functional change to lint itself.
|
#
1.1 |
|
02-Jan-2021 |
rillig |
lint: add a test for each message produced by lint1
Having a test for each message ensures that upcoming refactorings don't break the basic functionality. Adding the tests will also discover previously unknown bugs in lint.
The tests ensure that every lint message can actually be triggered, and they demonstrate how to do so. Having a separate file for each test leaves enough space for documenting historical anecdotes, rationale or edge cases, keeping them away from the source code.
The interesting details of this commit are in Makefile and t_integration.sh. All other files are just auto-generated.
When running the tests as part of ATF, they are packed together as a single test case. Conceptually, it would have been better to have each test as a separate test case, but ATF quickly becomes very slow as soon as a test program defines too many test cases, and 50 is already too many. The time complexity is O(n^2), not O(n) as one would expect. It's the same problem as in tests/usr.bin/make, which has over 300 test cases as well.
|
#
1.1 |
|
02-Jan-2021 |
rillig |
lint: add a test for each message produced by lint1
Having a test for each message ensures that upcoming refactorings don't break the basic functionality. Adding the tests will also discover previously unknown bugs in lint.
The tests ensure that every lint message can actually be triggered, and they demonstrate how to do so. Having a separate file for each test leaves enough space for documenting historical anecdotes, rationale or edge cases, keeping them away from the source code.
The interesting details of this commit are in Makefile and t_integration.sh. All other files are just auto-generated.
When running the tests as part of ATF, they are packed together as a single test case. Conceptually, it would have been better to have each test as a separate test case, but ATF quickly becomes very slow as soon as a test program defines too many test cases, and 50 is already too many. The time complexity is O(n^2), not O(n) as one would expect. It's the same problem as in tests/usr.bin/make, which has over 300 test cases as well.
|