From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha@arm.com>
To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Cc: Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com
Subject: Re: [rfa:testsuite} Overhaul sizeof.exp
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 10:07:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200202201806.SAA16821@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 20 Feb 2002 11:49:47 CST." <200202201749.g1KHnlv04009@duracef.shout.net>
mec@shout.net said:
> It sounds like we understand the alternatives and everyone's got
> opinions about them.
> [0] Status quo
> [1] FAIL the test
> [2] XFAIL the test
> [3] KFAIL the test
Well, speaking personally, I don't particularly like XFAIL because it
hides failures from me. Since I rarely see a run with zero FAILs the only
thing that is interesting is a diff between this and a previous run, to
tell me if an existing test has started failing, or whether a new test has
been added.
About the only reasonable use of XFAIL that I can think of is when we fail
because there was a bug in an external tool (such as the compiler) which
means we are unable to successfully run the test (but haven't failed so
badly as to get an UNRESOLVED -- we know the outcome we know its wrong,
but we know its because of an external problem). Everything else should
be a FAIL, because its our fault and we *should* fix it.
R.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-02-20 18:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-02-20 9:49 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-02-20 10:06 ` Fernando Nasser
2002-02-20 10:12 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-20 10:07 ` Richard Earnshaw [this message]
2002-02-20 10:07 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-20 10:18 ` Fernando Nasser
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-02-20 10:24 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-02-20 11:48 ` Fernando Nasser
2002-02-20 9:17 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-02-20 9:42 ` Fernando Nasser
2002-02-20 10:20 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-20 8:59 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-02-19 20:57 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-02-20 6:57 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-20 7:21 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-20 8:19 ` Fernando Nasser
2002-02-20 17:57 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-20 8:16 ` Fernando Nasser
2002-02-20 8:51 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-20 9:24 ` Fernando Nasser
2002-02-21 14:04 ` Jim Blandy
2002-02-21 14:23 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-02-19 20:43 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-02-21 14:03 ` Jim Blandy
2002-02-19 15:46 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2002-02-19 18:19 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-02-19 15:17 Andrew Cagney
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=200202201806.SAA16821@cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=rearnsha@arm.com \
--cc=Richard.Earnshaw@arm.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.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