From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fernando Nasser To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: msnyder@cygnus.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] gdb.base/callfuncs.exp: make all test names unique Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 11:20:00 -0000 Message-id: <3B0BFEE3.14B7400F@redhat.com> References: <200105231816.LAA13966@bosch.cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-05/msg00440.html Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote: > > chastain> ! gdb_test "next" "t_double_values\\(double_val1, double_val2\\);.*" "next 1" > chastain> ! gdb_test "next" "t_structs_c\\(struct_val1\\);.*" "next 2" > > snyder> I wonder if it would not be preferable to use "next over t_double_values" > snyder> and "next over t_structs_c". > > nasser> Michael (Chastain), please check it in your patch with these changes. > nasser> Thank you very much to help eliminating these ambiguities. > > Oops, actually that should be "next to t_double_values" rather than > "next over t_double_values" and so on. It still looks better than > "next" or "next 1". > > Works for me, I will use "next to t_double_values" and check it in. > Thanks again. Cheers, Fernando -- Fernando Nasser Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com 2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300 Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9