Re: RFC: KFAIL DejaGnu patch

[Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>]

Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
> That would only be useful if we always marked all tests - which we're
> awful about.  continue {2} might be any number of different continue
> statements in the test.

Let me explain in more detail.

Right now there are tests with output like this:

  gdb.base/foo.exp: PASS: continue
  gdb.base/foo.exp: PASS: continue
  gdb.base/foo.exp: PASS: continue
  gdb.base/foo.exp: PASS: continue

I have to do something to make the test names unique.  So I behave
as if the input is this:

  gdb.base/foo.exp: PASS: continue
  gdb.base/foo.exp: PASS: continue {2}
  gdb.base/foo.exp: PASS: continue {3}
  gdb.base/foo.exp: PASS: continue {4}

This is flawed, because if someone adds or subtracts sections from
the test, the sequence numbers will get re-numbered, and I lose the
ability to compare across many runs.  As you point out, "continue {2}"
might be in different places depending on conditional execution and
so on.

But I have to do *something*.  If I just do "$hash{$name} = $result",
then the totals don't even add up correctly.

Michael C