From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <gabriel@krisman.be>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PING] [PATCH] Fix gdb.fortran/array-element.exp failures.
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 12:50:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140910125037.GN28404@adacore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ppf4acb5.fsf@anubis.Home>
>
> Joel, thanks for your clarification.
>
> Ok, so we got this situation:
>
> The original testcase sets a breakpoint at the label continue and
> resumes execution until we reach it. On the Fortran file, this means
> the inferior has iterated over the whole loop before reaching the
> breakpoint for the first time. Then, the original testcase issues
> another continue command, causing the inferior to finish the execution
> earlier than expected, since we still want to make a final test on
> whether we print the second element. This causes the two test failures.
>
> My guess is that the original author meant to break after each loop
> iteration, instead of going all the way until the continue label.
>
> Nevertheless, stepping over a single iteration or stopping after the
> entire loop has no impact on the test results. So, what my patch does
> is simply remove the second "continue" command that would prematurely
> end inferior's execution, so we can actually test whether both elements
> are printed correctly after executing the loop.
>
> Other than that, when I first submitted this patch, Sergio asked me to
> simplify the testcase, because it felt unusual. That is what the other
> modifications are about.
OK, thank you for the explanation of the issue.
> 2014-08-17 Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <gabriel@krisman.be>
>
> * gdb.fortran/array-element.exp: Remove wrong "continue"
> command. Simplify test case.
OK to push.
My only comment is that simplications are indeed good, but it is
better if you can submit those separately from other changes.
It's easier to review the patch series that way, and it also
allows us separate the real change from the enhancement which
is expected to be a no-op.
Thanks :)
--
Joel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-10 12:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-04 5:58 Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-07-04 15:35 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2014-07-04 23:20 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-07-05 12:14 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2014-07-05 17:17 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-07-06 19:03 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2014-07-14 23:28 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-08-17 4:07 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-08-26 0:30 ` [PING] " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-09-04 19:31 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-09-09 13:09 ` Joel Brobecker
2014-09-09 14:55 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-09-09 15:45 ` Joel Brobecker
2014-09-09 18:17 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-09-10 12:50 ` Joel Brobecker [this message]
2014-09-10 16:11 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2014-09-11 3:25 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2014-09-09 15:08 ` Sergio Durigan Junior
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=20140910125037.GN28404@adacore.com \
--to=brobecker@adacore.com \
--cc=gabriel@krisman.be \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
/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