-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 122
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
Fix an assertion when building the clad benchmarks with clang18 on osx. #930
Conversation
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #930 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 94.08% 93.72% -0.36%
==========================================
Files 53 54 +1
Lines 7762 7782 +20
==========================================
- Hits 7303 7294 -9
- Misses 459 488 +29
... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes
|
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.
Looks good.
But, given that we will improve the error or diagnostic messages in the future, maybe we can use E->getBeginLoc
and E->getEndLoc
instead of creating fake ones.
Until now we explicitly tried to use the fakeLoc approach to consistently annotate where we need to handle source locations in a non-crashing way. We could but that would point to the original function. Is that what you want here? |
Although it would point to the original function, it will be really helpful for creating minimal reproducers from big functions, as these location informations in the primal function will point to the line or location of the troublesome expression. |
Ok. Let me change that. However, this comment is questioning our currently strategy here, right? If you agree we should open an issue where we suggest replacing all of the fake locations with ones pointing to the original function. |
I am in full support for the new strategy of pointing to original function locations, so that it provides ease of debugging. |
clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! 👍" |
I do not think the codecov complaint is relevant for this PR. Let's move forward. |
Unfortunately, it'd be difficult to come up with a test...