tests: Add testing for xdsl_opt_main

[webmiche]

This PR hacks together a way to test xdsl_opt_main through some functionality of the arg parser.

Overall, I am feeling like the split of execution models (in a python interpreter vs from command line) will always come back to haunt us. I am not sure whether we actually can build something cleanly without reimplementing lit essentially.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 86.60% // Head: 88.77% // Increases project coverage by +2.16% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (826166a) compared to base (e750bd0).
Patch coverage: 100.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

❗ Current head 826166a differs from pull request most recent head c3c8c1b. Consider uploading reports for the commit c3c8c1b to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #290      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   86.60%   88.77%   +2.16%     
==========================================
  Files          47       48       +1     
  Lines        6586     6600      +14     
  Branches     1107     1108       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits         5704     5859     +155     
+ Misses        650      505     -145     
- Partials      232      236       +4     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
tests/xdsl_opt/test_xdsl_opt.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
xdsl/xdsl_opt_main.py	77.64% <100.00%> (+57.64%)	⬆️
xdsl/irdl_mlir_printer.py	92.04% <0.00%> (+22.72%)	⬆️
xdsl/dialects/cmath.py	85.18% <0.00%> (+85.18%)	⬆️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[georgebisbas]

This manages to get the cov for the python files through these tests.
Was that intentional?

[webmiche]

Yes, it is the main intention of this PR to get the coverage for the xdsl_opt_main file.

[georgebisbas]

Yes, it is the main intention of this PR to get the coverage for the xdsl_opt_main file.

Cool, I just couldn't directly infer by the title and the description.
Maybe you could edit accordingly.

[georgebisbas]

Overall I am happy; just some improvement on the doc side of the usability of these files?
Trying to think as someone that has no idea why we need this driver for.

[georgebisbas]

Maybe add some comments/dosctring at the start of the file?

[webmiche]

That's actually impossible/hacky because I compare to this file later on.

Do you think a README in this folder would be enough?

[math-fehr]

Looks good to me!

[math-fehr]

Perfect! Thanks!