[python-committers] Is clang testing necessary?
Brett Cannon
brett at python.org
Fri Mar 24 12:24:41 EDT 2017
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 at 06:43 Antoine Pitrou <antoine at python.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am curious about the decision to have Travis-CI tests with both clang
> and gcc.
It was when I was trying to maximize Travis usefulness before the
migration. It's also because we as a project have found bugs in both
compilers previously (I know I personally reported a bug that affected both
of them once upstream).
> clang is a compiler which strives to be very compatible with
> gcc. I would understand testing under OS X with clang in addition to
> Linux with gcc, but I'm skeptical we gain much from testing both gcc and
> clang under Linux. Also, it lengthens CI times, as clang produces
> slower code in debug mode than gcc does (because we use "-Og" on gcc).
>
Is there an equivalent flag for clang we should be using?
>
> Or perhaps we could switch the clang build to produce a non-debug
> interpreter (and therefore a faster test suite)?
>
Another option is if we drop a compiler from a debug build we can use it
for the coverage run so it's at least being exercised somewhere.
If we drop either compiler I would vote for dropping gcc actually as the
compiler messages are much worse on gcc compared to clang. I guess it comes
down to whether we think CI should be used as a fallback for a failing test
suite or if we think CI might help contributors if they happen to have a
bug in their C code that they simply didn't notice (e.g. thought they made
an innocuous fix that didn't warrant a rebuild).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20170324/07350f66/attachment.html>
More information about the python-committers
mailing list