From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21417 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2009 17:19:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 21405 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Aug 2009 17:19:34 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ew0-f216.google.com (HELO mail-ew0-f216.google.com) (209.85.219.216) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:19:27 +0000 Received: by ewy12 with SMTP id 12so64659ewy.0 for ; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:19:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.210.10.14 with SMTP id 14mr345153ebj.24.1250788764761; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:19:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.2.99? (cpc2-cmbg8-0-0-cust61.cmbg.cable.ntl.com [82.6.108.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 10sm942709eyz.21.2009.08.20.10.19.23 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A8D88C8.8010404@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:19:00 -0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: Dave Korn , cgen@sourceware.org Subject: Re: "make gas-test" broken? References: <4A6B1A40.1020405@gmail.com> <4A8AD9F7.30605@sebabeach.org> <4A8B77A1.8020501@gmail.com> <4A8D82E2.3090805@sebabeach.org> In-Reply-To: <4A8D82E2.3090805@sebabeach.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cgen-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cgen-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-q3/txt/msg00062.txt.bz2 Doug Evans wrote: > Ya, that's the problem I was referring to in > http://sourceware.org/ml/cgen/2009-q3/msg00056.html. > I've changed method test-data of class to flag a warning and > compensate. It's not ideal, technically wrong, but for right now I > don't mind in this particular case. Ah, gotcha; that's this bit, right? > + ;; If an ifield has, e.g., 2 bits (values 0,1,2,3) and the keyword > + ;; only has two values, e.g. (foo 0) (bar 1), then we can get > + ;; invalid requests, i.e. for ifield values of 2 and 3. > + ;; It's not clear what to do here, but it seems like this is an > + ;; error in the description file. I also have some ifields like that, they're part of the opcode selection and not all combinations are valid. (I'll test filling them out with dummy entries before I update my sandbox just to see if that would have made a difference.) > Ya, this is a change in Guile's behaviour (circa 1.4?). string-append > use to accept symbols, it no longer does. I was just about to ask about guile versions. I've been noticing testsuite FAILs which could be related - I'll take a closer look at any that remain after I've updated. > Most of cgen has been updated, alas gas-test.scm wasn't - I've fixed it, > give it another try. Thank you Doug! I'll be back in touch. cheers, DaveK