From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4388 invoked by alias); 2 May 2011 16:54:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 4380 invoked by uid 22791); 2 May 2011 16:54:49 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 May 2011 16:54:35 +0000 Received: (qmail 9124 invoked from network); 2 May 2011 16:54:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 2 May 2011 16:54:34 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: Jan Kratochvil Subject: Re: [RFC] Fixing gdb.base/completion.exp (PR testsuite/12649) Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 16:54:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-28-generic; KDE/4.6.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Marek Polacek , Joel Brobecker References: <4DB82F26.30801@redhat.com> <201105021709.51088.pedro@codesourcery.com> <20110502163418.GA30891@host1.jankratochvil.net> In-Reply-To: <20110502163418.GA30891@host1.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201105021754.35146.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00025.txt.bz2 On Monday 02 May 2011 17:34:18, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Mon, 02 May 2011 18:09:50 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote: > > This is about completion, using one form or the other. > > We could move the "\t" form to readline-completion.exp, > > but I think a systematic approach to testing all the > > completion methods is better, and helps maintenance in the > > long run. > > I was addressing this by the readline/ and gdb/ parts testing differentiation, > the first paragraph of my mail. Sorry, I just snipped it as I didn't have anything to add. I had looked at your new readline test, and it didn't appear to cover every of interesting completion variant this completion.exp test exercises, but I think I may have overlooked. If it does, then I'll agree with putting that in, and switching the completion.exp test to "complete" only. -- Pedro Alves