From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mrs@wrs.com (Mike Stump) To: msimons@saic1.com Cc: egcs@cygnus.com Subject: Re: debugging for egcs Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 15:57:00 -0000 Message-id: <199802232243.OAA13877@kankakee.wrs.com> X-SW-Source: 1998-02/msg01098.html > From: Mike Simons > Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 05:07:43 -0500 (EST) > Cc: egcs@cygnus.com > Speaking of testcases... do all of the short code bug examples > reports posted to this list turn themselves into additional > testsuite cases? No, some just get dumped on the floor. :-( Counter claims are welcome. They are in the mailing list archive, but I think that is about it. Unless you submit an AI testcase that knows how to add itself to the testsuite, testcases will never add themselves to the testsuite. :-) > If not, how should they be packaged so they *are* added to the > regression suite? Well, the word `regression' has a meaning, and not all of the little bug examples are regressions. It would be good to have an expected to be broken directory (non-regression), and add all the various broken things to it. They way to get a testcase into such a place, is to find out the right place, and submit diffs to add it. For C++, you can check out any (or all) of the C++ testcases, and get a fairly good feel, fairly quickly. `make check' isn't that hard to type. make check-c++ 'RUNTESTFLAGS=-v -v old-deja.exp=eh6.C' for example will run just a single C++ testcase. A couple canonical example testcases: nit i; // ERROR - we should get an error message and: int i; // gets bogus error - come on, compile it for me As you can see, they are really easy to write, each one it just one line, and hopefully is really easy to understand. If people want to add non-regression testcases into the testsuite, how about a new directory, gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.broken? Just start submitting diffs for new files (diff -N)...