From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28258 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2010 19:09:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 28244 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Apr 2010 19:09:28 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=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, 26 Apr 2010 19:09:23 +0000 Received: (qmail 27825 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2010 19:09:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO macbook-2.local) (stan@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 26 Apr 2010 19:09:21 -0000 Message-ID: <4BD5E4D2.6020702@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 19:09:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Brobecker CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: why do we set prms_id/bug_id in GDB testcases? References: <20100426170109.GE2732@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: <20100426170109.GE2732@adacore.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: 2010-04/txt/msg00891.txt.bz2 Joel Brobecker wrote: > Hello, > > It's a question that has been nagging at me problably since I decided > that I was going to understand how to write testing with only stuff > that is actually useful, and following the recommended style... > > We often start testcases with the following statements: > > set prms_id 0 > set bug_id 0 > > [...] > > Maybe it's used internally by dejagnu? (I couldn't find evidence of that > in the dejagnu manual) > > It might have been used by some semi-internal Cygnus reporting thing, or just as likely it was intended to be part of the one of the many unimplemented ideas in Dejagnu. I would just whack it from GDB testsuite. In fact I would go further, and say that *anything* in the GDB testsuite without a known use should be deleted. The unfinished bits routinely soak up our time puzzling over what they are supposed to be for. If someone has a use for some bit, then it's up to them to document in the testsuite somewhere. Stan