New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 912040 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Fixed
Owner:
Closed: Dec 5
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 1
Type: Bug

Blocking:
issue 904337



Sign in to add a comment

missing_mixin_marker clang plugin test failing on tot bots

Project Member Reported by h...@chromium.org, Dec 5

Issue description

E.g. from here:
https://ci.chromium.org/buildbot/chromium.clang/ToTLinux/4557
Note that the line number mixin_marker.cpp:47 has changed to 48 with the new clang, which seems incorrect.


Testing missing_mixin_marker.cpp... failed: expected and actual differed
Actual:
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:15:58: warning: [blink-gc] Garbage-collected class 'Derived' derives mixin class 'Mixin'. You must add USING_GARBAGE_COLLECTED_MIXIN(Derived).
class Derived : public GarbageCollected<Derived>, public Mixin {
                                                  ~~~~~~~^~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:9:22: note: [blink-gc] Mixin base class derived here:
class Mixin : public GarbageCollectedMixin {
              ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:27:29: warning: [blink-gc] Garbage-collected class 'MySupplement' derives mixin class 'Supplement<blink::Derived>'. You must add USING_GARBAGE_COLLECTED_MIXIN(MySupplement).
                     public Supplement<Derived> {
                     ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:20:27: note: [blink-gc] Mixin base class derived here:
class Supplement : public GarbageCollectedMixin {
                   ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:53:35: warning: [blink-gc] Garbage-collected class 'PureVirtualDerived' derives mixin class 'Mixin'. You must add USING_GARBAGE_COLLECTED_MIXIN(PureVirtualDerived).
class PureVirtualDerived : public PureVirtual {
                           ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:48:66: note: [blink-gc] Mixin base class derived here:
class PureVirtual : public GarbageCollected<PureVirtual>, public Mixin {
                                                          ~~~~~~~^~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:9:22: note: [blink-gc] Mixin base class derived here:
class Mixin : public GarbageCollectedMixin {
              ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3 warnings generated.
Expected:
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:15:58: warning: [blink-gc] Garbage-collected class 'Derived' derives mixin class 'Mixin'. You must add USING_GARBAGE_COLLECTED_MIXIN(Derived).
class Derived : public GarbageCollected<Derived>, public Mixin {
                                                  ~~~~~~~^~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:9:22: note: [blink-gc] Mixin base class derived here:
class Mixin : public GarbageCollectedMixin {
              ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:27:29: warning: [blink-gc] Garbage-collected class 'MySupplement' derives mixin class 'Supplement<blink::Derived>'. You must add USING_GARBAGE_COLLECTED_MIXIN(MySupplement).
                     public Supplement<Derived> {
                     ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:20:27: note: [blink-gc] Mixin base class derived here:
class Supplement : public GarbageCollectedMixin {
                   ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:52:35: warning: [blink-gc] Garbage-collected class 'PureVirtualDerived' derives mixin class 'Mixin'. You must add USING_GARBAGE_COLLECTED_MIXIN(PureVirtualDerived).
class PureVirtualDerived : public PureVirtual {
                           ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:47:66: note: [blink-gc] Mixin base class derived here:
class PureVirtual : public GarbageCollected<PureVirtual>, public Mixin {
                                                          ~~~~~~~^~~~~
missing_mixin_marker.cpp:9:22: note: [blink-gc] Mixin base class derived here:
class Mixin : public GarbageCollectedMixin {
              ~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3 warnings generated.

 
> Note that the line number mixin_marker.cpp:47 has changed to 48 with the new clang, which seems incorrect.

Oh wait, no, 48 is more correct. So maybe someone fixed something and we should just update the test...
Oh, it's not a regression; the test is new! Reverting here: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/1362901
Owner: h...@chromium.org
Status: Fixed (was: Available)
The revert landed here: #613942 but I got the Bug field wrong.

Sign in to add a comment