On 27-02-2020 17:02, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 2/21/20 3:35 PM, Tom de Vries wrote:
> 
>> I think we don't want to integrate -lbl in the user_code parsing, because:
>> ...
>> gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" {
>> 	-re "bla" {
>> 	}
>> 	-lbl
>> }
>> ...
>> and:
>> ...
>> gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" {
>> 	-lbl
>> 	-re "bla" {
>> 	}
>> }
>> ...
>> will have the same effect, which is likely to cause confusion.
> 
> Well:
> 
>  gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" {
> 	-re "bar" {
> 	}
> 	-timeout 60
>  }
> 
> and:
> 
>  gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" {
> 	-timeout 60
> 	-re "bla" {
> 	}
>  }
> 
> also have the same effect.  So there's precedent and it goes
> all the way back to expect.
> 

Hm, I see.

>> [gdb/testsuite] Add -lbl option in gdb_test_multiple
>>
>> Add gdb_test_multiple option -lbl, that adds a regexp after the user code that
>> reads one line, and discards it:
>> ...
>>            -re "\r\n\[^\r\n\]*(?=\r\n)" {
>>                exp_continue
>>            }
>> ...
>>
>> In order to be able to write:
>> ...
>> gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" {
>>   ...
>> } -lbl
>> ...
>> as opposed to having to insert the "" for the prompt_regexp arguments:
>> ...
>> gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" {
>>   ...
>> } "" -lbl
>> ...
>> rewrite the promp_regexp argument usage into:
>> ...
>> gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" {
>>   ...
>> } -prompt $prompt_regexp
>> ...
> 
> Honestly, to me, this:
> 
>  gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" {
>    ...
>  } -lbl -prompt $prompt_regexp
> 
> looks a bit harder to grok than:
> 
>  gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" {
>    -lbl
>    -prompt $prompt_regexp
>    ...
>  }
> 
> ... because those options appear at the end, after the regexes.
> 
> Alternatively, if you don't like the -lbl within the {} block, and if
> we're going to use "-" options, how about supporting them before
> the {} user code block, so that the user code block is always
> at the end?  Like:
> 
>  gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" -lbl {
>    ...
>  }
> 
>  gdb_test_multiple "command" "testname" -prompt $prompt_regexp {
>    ...
>  }
> 
> That should be doable with:
> 
>  -proc gdb_test_multiple { command message user_code { prompt_regexp "" } } {
>  +proc gdb_test_multiple { command message args } {
> 
> and then walking the $args list, processing "-" arguments, and interpreting
> the first non-"-" argument as the user code block (and erroring out if there
> are more arguments).  I think the gdb_test_multiple code would look quite similar
> to your patch, except that the user_code parameter would no longer be a parameter,
> instead it would be a local variable set to the first non-"-" element of $args.

Yes, I like that suggestion.

Implemented and attached below.

OK for trunk.

Thanks,
- Tom