From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-42408-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 4966 invoked by alias); 7 Dec 2001 02:22:10 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 4914 invoked from network); 7 Dec 2001 02:22:09 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Dec 2001 02:22:09 -0000
Received: by nile.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 338)
	id 026A6F28CB; Thu,  6 Dec 2001 21:21:20 -0500 (EST)
From: dewar@gnat.com
To: bosch@gnat.com, zack@codesourcery.com
Subject: Re: ACATS legal status cleared by FSF
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, guerby@acm.org
Message-Id: <20011207022120.026A6F28CB@nile.gnat.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 19:09:00 -0000
X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00344.txt.bz2

<<My experience working on the C front end has been that tests for proper
diagnostics from ill-formed code are extremely useful.  Can you explain
why they're almost useless for the Ada front end?
>>

It's just the experience that I mentioned, that most of the work is
fiddling for perfectly acceptable correct changes in messages.

<<This is all fair.  How about a compromise position where you check the B
tests into the CVS tree but don't bother adding dejagnu harnesses for them.
They are then instantly available if they are needed.
>>

Certainly they are not secret. And we can certainly check them in. The
question is whether to set up the harness with the baselines or not.
(evaluating B test runs without the baselines is an overwhelming task).