From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>,
Marek Polacek <mpolacek@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Fixing gdb.base/completion.exp (PR testsuite/12649)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:23:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201104271623.21862.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110427150529.GA2489@adacore.com>
On Wednesday 27 April 2011 16:05:29, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > Thus, my point is that we could replace those "send_gdb + sleep +
> > gdb_expect" sequences with just one gdb_test{,multiple,no_output}. I
> > don't know yet if this transformation is possible for every test in
> > the completion.exp file. Maybe the changes would be quite dramatical.
> > However, this test would be _much_ simpler and much faster. Also, the
> > current formatting is ugly ;).
> >
> > So, do you think this is a good idea? Is there something I'm missing?
>
> I don't know the history of the testcase, and this is only my own
> opinion, but I tend to agree with you. I think we should keep one
> test with \t, to make sure that a tab does trigger the completion,
> but the rest of the testcase should be using the "complete" command.
> That's what we do at AdaCore anyways...
How to fix the race that Marek is seeing in that leftover \t instance?
Marek wrote:
> The '\t's do not work well with char-wise read1() and thus
> they're occasionally causing problems.
What are these problems exactly?
I also wonder what's the rationale for the sleeps in the
current implementation?
> # tests for command completion
> #
> # Here are some useful test cases for completion.
> # They should be tested with both M-? and TAB.
An idea would be for the test to exercise all supported completion
methods (using a convenience procedure, not duplicating
the tests!).
--
Pedro Alves
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-27 15:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-27 14:59 Marek Polacek
2011-04-27 15:05 ` Joel Brobecker
2011-04-27 15:13 ` Tom Tromey
2011-04-27 15:23 ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2011-04-27 17:41 ` Marek Polacek
2011-04-28 14:19 ` Pedro Alves
2011-04-28 15:14 ` Pedro Alves
2011-04-29 14:10 ` Marek Polacek
2011-05-02 14:58 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-01 9:17 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-05-02 14:00 ` Marek Polacek
2011-05-02 14:19 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-02 14:53 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-05-02 15:30 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-02 15:44 ` Joel Brobecker
2011-05-02 15:50 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-02 15:56 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-05-02 16:10 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-02 16:35 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-05-02 16:54 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-02 17:04 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-05-02 17:21 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-05-02 17:23 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-02 17:29 ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-05-02 17:53 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-02 17:56 ` Pedro Alves
2011-05-05 15:11 ` Tom Tromey
2011-04-28 11:56 ` Marek Polacek
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=201104271623.21862.pedro@codesourcery.com \
--to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
--cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=mpolacek@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