From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id ZiWLDMMV1mGpZQAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2022 17:03:47 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 2209F1EE18; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 17:03:47 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 919C71E61F for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 17:03:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1562F385802D for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 22:03:46 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 1562F385802D DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1641420226; bh=A/pRqJEyExWMB25cRSGllWKwj4+8/MuGCFCUsLznU0A=; h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=Xw8aX4xMeI29u4tDQzQUx8a/kzNc4nKzvUd1B3BcRhC/FLqVGDESV84RJljaLHVFO 1wncWPiGsf4EONPv0G2D2ulgn696NVb+ItryCxgjauLXqXmkuTLKZkxt9VCvO1XaNC T97qRD9vAz9fAOMtYGEKt985VxFaLW5RIhK7ktIM= Received: from lndn.lancelotsix.com (vps-42846194.vps.ovh.net [IPv6:2001:41d0:801:2000::2400]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52CDB3858425 for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 22:03:26 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 52CDB3858425 Received: from Plymouth (unknown [IPv6:2a02:390:9086:0:bf0b:935:d6c2:84bd]) by lndn.lancelotsix.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D04C6830F2; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 22:03:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 22:03:21 +0000 To: Andrew Burgess Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/29] gdb/testsuite: Remove duplicates from gdb.base/dfp-test.exp Message-ID: <20220105220302.5t2jp5iqn4efhmp2@Plymouth> References: <20211121175636.779325-1-lsix@lancelotsix.com> <20211121175636.779325-12-lsix@lancelotsix.com> <20220104142625.GL1845520@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220104142625.GL1845520@redhat.com> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.11 (lndn.lancelotsix.com [0.0.0.0]); Wed, 05 Jan 2022 22:03:24 +0000 (UTC) X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Lancelot SIX via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Lancelot SIX Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > > 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 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 --- 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