From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id TXtVM5TXuWFJLQAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 06:55:00 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id C9C3A1F0D2; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 06:55:00 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,RDNS_DYNAMIC 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 4A76C1E940 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 06:55:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDB483858410 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 11:54:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail-wm1-f51.google.com (mail-wm1-f51.google.com [209.85.128.51]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5035C3858402 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 11:54:49 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 5035C3858402 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=palves.net Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-wm1-f51.google.com with SMTP id g191-20020a1c9dc8000000b0032fbf912885so15779900wme.4 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 03:54:49 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CvXnfydYPNoomrJQ1S/PiWm3gsZhwDWfFekysY5v2NA=; b=zs9J4iGXmq/aztF0x6HfV3G2/o1iBucES7HT92KOsIg8w3i1mMQoj/WRM7FJVWF+xa H4FzBoT1DsM3UYLeLYsEyP1scy7H5/UHjpceWyGymw8l/K/KAqMc0UARkNk7NrnHFskC bHKdToUXCx1/nMxvQ/0d1CGJUujpSp70gSdQuIFrRArzGFifTpkp8smzECjpQmvgQ+7N J+2WRCO8PkMpDqlsksDNoT65FHU006p+kab5+oQUtWONmIcNX4twpF9+F7AqizqS0JLo li0u00WHzbCbneVulQj37y+NrEQKAgahYqxHqs4KmujmKGQ5IWOYLq77/diFpgbkUiqm 7fJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533A6HHvIJdu5q4syVel7ccz0F11NZSlf/Wjj73Y3USF4Zc1djCL 71Q7dWhYJRkFuSwv+k8c7w4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwV4bR9/4RzPbwRJ0zVam+ZQDgRdwIXWoTWBitAQkERilo0oihO8b2G+FKok2uMHRKu9wlqUw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3b83:: with SMTP id n3mr4173095wms.116.1639569288284; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 03:54:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2001:8a0:f912:1a00:d3db:ac91:4b9e:1449? ([2001:8a0:f912:1a00:d3db:ac91:4b9e:1449]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l4sm1722683wrv.94.2021.12.15.03.54.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Dec 2021 03:54:47 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <65477287-5757-406c-9ce0-9b358285e2ee@palves.net> Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 11:54:46 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.3.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/29] gdb/testsuite: Remove duplicates from gdb.base/dfp-exprs.exp Content-Language: en-US To: Lancelot SIX References: <20211121175636.779325-1-lsix@lancelotsix.com> <20211121175636.779325-14-lsix@lancelotsix.com> <0e6cef60-84ed-011b-8113-bc4bac1cce0e@palves.net> <20211215000131.lvdpsdwcrlwyktgh@Plymouth> From: Pedro Alves In-Reply-To: <20211215000131.lvdpsdwcrlwyktgh@Plymouth> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: , Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" On 2021-12-15 00:01, Lancelot SIX wrote: >> Hmm, it's not super obvious to me what the intention was here. For one, I can't spot a pattern in >> the sequence here. Am I missing it? >> >> If we alpha sort the lines (sort-lines in emacs), and then add the missing combinations, we end up with: >> >> # Keep the list alpha sorted. >> gdb_test "p 1.2dd < 1.3dd" " = 1" >> gdb_test "p 1.2dd < 1.3df" " = 1" >> gdb_test "p 1.2dd < 1.3dl" " = 1" >> gdb_test "p 1.2df < 1.3dd" " = 1" >> gdb_test "p 1.2df < 1.3df" " = 1" >> gdb_test "p 1.2df < 1.3dl" " = 1" >> gdb_test "p 1.2dl < 1.3dd" " = 1" >> gdb_test "p 1.2dl < 1.3df" " = 1" >> gdb_test "p 1.2dl < 1.3dl" " = 1" >> >> But then, the == tests are also missing some combinations. I think that if we do this >> programmatically with a for loop, we can exercise all the combinations in much clearer code, >> removing the need to eyeball for all suffixes. See patch below. >> >> I've also added a lot more combinations, testing all comparison operators comprehensively. >> >> The result is 262 unique tests vs 104 today. >> >> Let me know what you think. >> > > Hi, > > I actually like your approach very much. I goes beyond what I was > looking for when I started this series, but I see no reason not to go > the extra step. I am not sure if there an intention to be exhaustive in > the test as it was. > > I have replaced my previous patch with yours locally (after adjusting > the commit message, and re-testing). Great, thanks. Feel free to merge it.