This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: C++ PATCH: PR c++/10032


On Thu, 2003-07-10 at 11:19, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> 
> > + // PR10032
> > + // { dg-options "-pedantic" }
> > + 
> > + int main() {
> > +   goto label;   // { dg-error "" }
> > +   
> > +   int temp = 1; // { dg-error "" } 
> > +   
> > +   label:        // { dg-error "" } 
> > +     return 1;
> > + }
> 
> Did this testcase actually fail without the patch? 

No, but I was hoping nobody would notice that.

It's the right test case, but, as you say, dg.exp is broken in this
respect.  Some day, when I finish up all the QMTest stuff in
gcc.c-torture, etc., etc. this will all just work.

There is no good way to test for this at present, short of perhaps
putting "error:" in the pattern strings, which is more fragile than I
would like.

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]