From: Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>
To: Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>
Cc: "Sharma, Alok Kumar" <AlokKumar.Sharma@amd.com>,
"George, Jini Susan" <JiniSusan.George@amd.com>,
"Achra, Nitika" <Nitika.Achra@amd.com>,
"gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb/fortran: Allow Flang MAIN_ in Fortran testing
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 14:37:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200424133750.GD3522@embecosm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87sggthwk2.fsf@tromey.com>
* Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com> [2020-04-24 06:56:13 -0600]:
> >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> writes:
>
> Andrew> And my main thought is that what we should do is override runto_main
> Andrew> in lib/fortran.exp, and then switch all of the test over to using that
> Andrew> instead, this would be more consistent with how the C/C++ tests work
> Andrew> then.
>
> Redefining procs is a bit dangerous because it can change the test
> environment for subsequent tests, which may not be Fortran tests. I'm
> not sure if that's what you were proposing but I figured I'd point it
> out just in case.
OK, that's a valid point.
Maybe we should just make 'proc runto_main' smarter then? Add some
logic to pick a suitable name for the main function per-language?
Or maybe we should do 'proc fortran_runto_main' .... ?
I'd just like something that's more inline with the existing
'runto_main' in style I think..
Thanks,
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-24 13:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-24 9:44 Sharma, Alok Kumar
2020-04-24 10:17 ` Andrew Burgess
2020-04-24 11:48 ` Sharma, Alok Kumar
2020-04-24 12:58 ` Tom Tromey
2020-04-24 12:56 ` Tom Tromey
2020-04-24 13:37 ` Andrew Burgess [this message]
2020-04-24 14:02 ` Tom Tromey
2020-04-24 15:54 ` Sharma, Alok Kumar
2020-04-27 9:07 ` Andrew Burgess
2020-04-27 18:02 ` Sharma, Alok Kumar
2020-04-29 9:15 ` Andrew Burgess
2020-05-10 9:21 ` Sharma, Alok Kumar
2020-05-10 19:24 ` Sharma, Alok Kumar
2020-04-24 10:26 Sharma, Alok Kumar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200424133750.GD3522@embecosm.com \
--to=andrew.burgess@embecosm.com \
--cc=AlokKumar.Sharma@amd.com \
--cc=JiniSusan.George@amd.com \
--cc=Nitika.Achra@amd.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=tom@tromey.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).