[5.0] Mark another thorough String test as requiring an optimized stdlib #22043
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…wiftlang#21835) This one's taking a pretty long time on simulators, only sometimes making it under the timeout limit. (cherry picked from commit a628d5d)
|
@swift-ci Please test |
airspeedswift
approved these changes
Jan 22, 2019
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Explanation: This particular test is taking a pretty long time on simulators, only sometimes making it under the timeout limit. It's a pretty thorough test of string normalization, which means that an unoptimized stdlib is going to take a long time to complete it.
Scope: Disables this one test in "unoptimized stdlib" configurations.
Issue: rdar://problem/46736948
Risk: None. Runs a test less often, with the disabled configuration being something we don't ship.
Testing: Passed CI testing on master.
Reviewed by: @milseman