@lenary Thanks for looking at this. Indeed, those uses of %i where it should be %u were oversights.

Ace, thank you.

I had not intended to create this new diff - abandoning.

@lenary Thanks for the review! I have fixed the compiler warning that you spotted. I hope I did the right thing when I uploaded a revised patch (this is my first time working with the differential/arcanist workflow).

Fixed a compiler warning as spotted by @lenary

Hi @anemet and @lenary - I am keen to contribute these tests that improve on the code coverage achieved by the existing test suite. It's my first LLVM-related patch so I wasn't sure who the right folks to ask for reviews were, but I saw that you'd each done some recent reviews in the test suite so I wondered whether you might be suitable to review this, or to suggest other reviewers.