This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: C++ BUGS: comma operator
- To: nathan at cs dot bris dot ac dot uk, nathan at acm dot org
- Subject: Re: C++ BUGS: comma operator
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 07 Sep 1999 08:52:27 -0700
- Cc: egcs-bugs at egcs dot cygnus dot com
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <37D4DFD5.A5FDA3D8@acm.org>
Nathan --
These test-cases are fine, except that new expected-to-fail tests
should be marked with XFAIL. The regression test-suite should not
double as the bug database. (Jason Molenda has got us a nice GNATS
database set up; we just have to start using it.) When people run
`make check-g++', there should be no unexpected failures, unless
they've just broken something. That makes it very easy for developers
to know they've not screwed up; otherwise, you need to know the magic
list of tests that are OK to fail.
Thanks!
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com