From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22948 invoked by alias); 2 Mar 2012 22:49:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact archer-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Sender: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Received: (qmail 22911 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Mar 2012 22:49:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4F514E30.7070400@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 22:49:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: archer@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [Archer] Stop the Insanity! Linespec Rewrite References: <4F501EC1.3050104@redhat.com> <20120302190658.GH2867@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20120302190658.GH2867@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2012-q1/txt/msg00015.txt.bz2 On 03/02/2012 11:06 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote: > I reviewed the gdb.ada testsuite, and it appears that I failed to > add a testcase for those. I will put that on my list. I have a patch to fix this. Thank you for bringing this to my attention (and adding tests for it). Your new operator_bps.exp passes 100% on archer-keiths-linespec-rewrite. [I haven't pushed the patch yet.] > I have noticed a few other things: > > . Very minor: We now accept the "task" keyword in any casing (?). > So now "break foo TASK 3" is accepted, whereas it wasn't in the past. I need to audit that. Part of the cleanup phase. Lots to do yet. > . Our testsuite spotted a couple of crashes. They might be related > to the crash that Tom mentioned, although I kind of doubt it. > Nevertheless, I'll investigate them after you've looked at Tom's > report, just in case they end up having the same cause. If you can tell me how to reproduce, I will take a look. There are probably lots of gotchas all over the place. I relied heavily (too much?) on the test suite. I wonder what bugs Go, D, and other languages might expose. > I'd like to resolve the issues mentioned above before the patch > actually goes in, [...] Absolutely. I would not even think of submitting this for official review if it had any (real) regressions. Thank you very much for your help. Keith