Re: Will the consistent failures in EGCS be fixed soon?

[Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>]

> | Ok, I'll buy that; so how about another document describing known 
> | failures, and the part of the compiler responsible -- this might help to 
> | save hours of wasted work trying to track down the cause of problems that 
> | have already been investigated but not yet fixed.
> | 
> | Richard
> 
> This `database' could grow pretty large.
> I imagine that a sort of E-mail thread on each test case, kept
> on the website would be favourable above including it in the
> tar.gz.
> 

Not necessarily.  Broken tests get fixed, in which case the need to 
document the cause of the ex-failure goes away.  Working tests don't need 
any documentation.  Of course, the test may fail again at some later date, 
but that will need investigation in its own right; I'd guess the chance 
that the same reason would be the cause of a future failure (assuming the 
problem was fixed properly in the first place) would be no more than 50/50.


Richard.