Enable debug info by default

[dwblaikie]

Discussed in the toolchain meeting today - we'd like to try having this on by default and see if the cost isn't too high.

The nodebug test is a bit verbose, because it doesn't have the --exclude-dump-file-prefix that test_file would usually add. Is there a nicer way I could write this test to verify that --no-debug-info does what it's meant to?

[jonmeow]

Note, I removed the description boilerplate from the top comment.

Note nodebug isn't just verbose, it includes your local machine paths; it's host-dependent. Maybe add something like %{core_package_dir} to file_test support so that you can add --exclude-dump-file-prefix=%{core_package_dir} to ARGS? (it seems fine if you want to leave that as a TODO, but the test file would then need to be removed from the PR)

[dwblaikie]

Note, I removed the description boilerplate from the top comment.

Ah, thanks for that! I'll figure out the description template, etc eventually/keep an eye out for that in the future.

Note nodebug isn't just verbose, it includes your local machine paths; it's host-dependent.

Oh, right - good call/catch. Thanks!

Maybe add something like %{core_package_dir} to file_test support so that you can add --exclude-dump-file-prefix=%{core_package_dir} to ARGS? (it seems fine if you want to leave that as a TODO, but the test file would then need to be removed from the PR)

Looking into that. I'm a bit of a testing pedant, so would prefer not to commit the change untested, and happy to frontload the test infrastructure improvements necessary to ensure coverage.

Ended up that I needed to add generic functionality to file_test_base (since it errors on unknown characters after %) - so allowed derived classes to expose a collection of replacements, and used those...

[jonmeow]

A couple more things to change:

1. testing/file_test/README.md is trying to document syntax, can you add a note about this under where it says "Supported replacements within arguments"?

2. In testing/file_test/testdata, can you add a test similar to args.carbon, with something like ARGS: abc %{replacement} %s?

   • In testing/file_test/file_test_base_test.cpp, if you add the new test file where args.carbon is (the early return), you can validate that the replacement is correctly round tripping.
   • Note this directory also has an autoupdate script (a more trivial one than toolchain's)

[jonmeow]

2. In testing/file_test/testdata, can you add a test similar to args.carbon, with something like ARGS: abc %{replacement} %s?

Or really, even just add %{replacement} to args.carbon. It doesn't need to be a separate file, it can just be added to the existing test.

[dwblaikie]

A couple more things to change:

1. testing/file_test/README.md is trying to document syntax, can you add a note about this under where it says "Supported replacements within arguments"?

2. In testing/file_test/testdata, can you add a test similar to args.carbon, with something like ARGS: abc %{replacement} %s?

   • In testing/file_test/file_test_base_test.cpp, if you add the new test file where args.carbon is (the early return), you can validate that the replacement is correctly round tripping.
   • Note this directory also has an autoupdate script (a more trivial one than toolchain's)

Ah, for sure - thanks for the pointers. Done!

[jonmeow]

Just a reminder for the README.md edit, in case it was missed. :)

[dwblaikie]

Just a reminder for the README.md edit, in case it was missed. :)

Ah, thought I'd done that - sorry I missed it. Added some now.

[jonmeow]

Thanks! All looks good here.