Re: [PATCH 11/29] gdb/testsuite: Remove duplicates from gdb.base/dfp-test.exp

[Lancelot SIX via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>]

> 
> Did you consider using proc_with_prefix?  You could change
> d32_set_tests and d64_set_tests like this:
> 
>   proc_with_prefix d32_set_tests {} {
>     ...
>   }
> 
>   proc_with_prefix d64_set_tests {} {
>     ...
>   }
> 
> And this will cause all of the enclosed tests to be prefixed with
> 'd32_set_tests' or 'd64_set_tests'.  This seems a slightly neater
> solution, what do you think?
> 
> Thanks,
> Andrew

Hi,

I like your approach better.

I have implemented it in the attached patch.

Thanks,
Lancelot.

---
From 58a73a850f5b6f12e54d74b27ed3ef7ef96c9579 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lancelot SIX <lsix@lancelotsix.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 00:10:07 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] gdb/testsuite: Remove duplicates from gdb.base/dfp-test.exp

When running the testsuite, I have:

    Running .../gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dfp-test.exp ...
    DUPLICATE: gdb.base/dfp-test.exp: 1.23E is an invalid number
    DUPLICATE: gdb.base/dfp-test.exp: 1.23E45A is an invalid number
    DUPLICATE: gdb.base/dfp-test.exp: 1.23E is an invalid number
    DUPLICATE: gdb.base/dfp-test.exp: 1.23E45A is an invalid number

Fix by using proc_with_prefix where appropriate.

Tested on x86_64-linux.
Co-Author-By: Andrew Burgess <aburgess@redhat.com>
---
 gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dfp-test.exp | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dfp-test.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dfp-test.exp
index e43ecd0e15e..4866d0ae094 100644
--- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dfp-test.exp
+++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dfp-test.exp
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ if ![runto_main] then {
 
 set sizeof_long [get_sizeof "long" 4]
 
-proc d32_set_tests {} {
+proc_with_prefix d32_set_tests {} {
 
     gdb_test "p d32=123.45df" " = 123.45"
     gdb_test "p d32=12345.df" " = 12345"
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ proc d32_set_tests {} {
     gdb_test "p d32=1.23E45Adf" ".*Conversion syntax.*" "1.23E45A is an invalid number"
 }
 
-proc d64_set_tests {} {
+proc_with_prefix d64_set_tests {} {
 
     gdb_test "p d64=123.45dd" " = 123.45"
     gdb_test "p d64=12345.dd" " = 12345"
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ proc d64_set_tests {} {
     gdb_test "p d64=1.23E45Add" ".*Conversion syntax.*" "1.23E45A is an invalid number"
 }
 
-proc d128_set_tests {} {
+proc_with_prefix d128_set_tests {} {
 
     gdb_test "p d128=123.45dl" " = 123.45"
     gdb_test "p d128=12345.dl" " = 12345"
-- 
2.34.1