From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-15920-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 8645 invoked by alias); 28 May 2002 15:58:15 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 8609 invoked from network); 28 May 2002 15:58:11 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO potter.sfbay.redhat.com) (205.180.83.107)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 May 2002 15:58:11 -0000
Received: from redhat.com (remus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.252])
	by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g4SFuBv14467;
	Tue, 28 May 2002 08:56:11 -0700
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:59:00 -0000
From: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com>
To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: gdb.c++ testsuite 2.1: try_catch.exp
Message-Id: <20020528085804.256cadb0.bkoz@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <200205271924.g4RJOJw27502@duracef.shout.net>
References: <200205271924.g4RJOJw27502@duracef.shout.net>
Reply-To: bkoz@redhat.com
Organization: Red Hat / Paris
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2002-05/txt/msg00968.txt.bz2


> There was a cut-and-paste error here (line 122 versus line 118):
> 
>   send_gdb "break 122\n"
>   gdb_expect {
>      -re "Breakpoint \[0-9\]*.*line 118\\.\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
>      ...
> 
> I rewrote all the send_gdb/gdb_expect pairs to gdb_test.
> This simplifies the test script a lot:
> 
>   gdb_test "break 61" "Breakpoint \[0-9\]*.*line 61\\."
>   gdb_test "continue"
>   "Continuing\\.\r\n\r\nBreakpoint.*at.*try_catch\\.cc:61\r\n.*"
>   "continue to 61"
 
Looks good, thanks for your additions. 

> The actual tests are very simple.  They don't test any of the
> try/catch functionality in gdb, just the control flow of the target
> program. A simple test is better than no test; someone can add more
> tests to this later.

Right. Actually, this has not worked in the past, so I thought it'd be
best to start with the basics.

> All the tests pass in all the configurations that I tested:

Great.