From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27392 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2019 06:37:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 27361 invoked by uid 89); 6 Oct 2019 06:37:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-13.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=cced X-HELO: mx1.suse.de Received: from mx2.suse.de (HELO mx1.suse.de) (195.135.220.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Oct 2019 06:37:34 +0000 Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CADFAD88; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 06:37:32 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Add -cooked pattern flag to gdb_test_multiple To: Andrew Burgess Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20190919111322.GA29391@delia> <20190919161846.GC4962@embecosm.com> <62b20c8f-6792-c17e-621a-946002df6df9@suse.de> <20190919192423.GF4962@embecosm.com> <86b5c1b8-ac35-5c7e-1a5d-89b8563ab761@suse.de> <20191005153835.GL4962@embecosm.com> From: Tom de Vries Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Message-ID: <21c198a3-5013-b7e2-1d72-00470704e899@suse.de> Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2019 06:37:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191005153835.GL4962@embecosm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-10/txt/msg00173.txt.bz2 On 05-10-19 17:38, Andrew Burgess wrote: > * Tom de Vries [2019-10-05 08:05:03 +0200]: > >> [ was: Re: [PATCH][gdb/testsuite] Introduce gdb_test_ext ] >> >> On 19-09-19 21:24, Andrew Burgess wrote: >>> On further thought, I actually think there's no need for an extra >>> function at all, we can get all the benefit (as I see it) by possibly >>> updating gdb_test_multiple. I'm travelling right now so can't code >>> this up, but I think a solution that does something like this: >>> >>> gdb_test_multiple "command" "test name" { >>> -re "full regexp here$gdb_prompt" { >>> pass $gdb_test_multiple_name >>> } >>> -output "pattern without prompt" { >>> fail $gdb_test_multiple_name >>> } >>> } >>> >>> So using '-re' and '-output' to specialise the behaviour of >>> gdb_test_multiple, and adding in the $gdb_test_multiple_name variable. >>> >>> When I get back to my desk I'll try to code this up. >> >> Hi, >> >> I took a stab at this. I'm not sure about the naming though. >> >> For the pattern flag I used the name -cooked. Perhaps -wrap is better? >> Any better suggestions? >> >> I used gdb_test_multiple_message (using the 'message' postfix because it >> matched the name of the gdb_test_multiple argument) for the convenience >> variable, but it's a tad long, perhaps we could abbreviate to >> 'gtm_message'? > > This duplicates work in this patch: > > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2019-10/msg00023.html > I see, that's unfortunate. [ FWIW, it would have helped me if you would have submitted continuing this thread, or cc-ed me on the new thread, or mentioned the new thread at this thread. ] > I was just about to merge that patch, but I'll leave it for a couple > of days in case you'd like to provide feedback. > > Pedro's suggestion, which I was going to adopt was 'gdb_test_name'. OK, I'll take a look and follow up at the new thread if I have any comments. Thanks, - Tom