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++/Obj-C++ PATCH] Fix Objective-C++ breakage


On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>  This is useful data.  It would seem to suggest that C/C++ testing would
>  have caught most of your problems, with the exception of the
>  complex-number testing, where you found Fortran testing to be most
>  effective.

For me, yes but this was just from memory and is not exactly the full
truth.  As I was touching in most cases the front-ends, I needed to
test them anyways so just testing C/C++ was not the correct thing to
do really.  Also sometimes you never know which front-end's testsuite
will produce a problem with the patch you are working on; you can
estimate but this is never a good idea. Also why are we complaining
about testing times?

I rather we have more testing than less when it comes to testing the
compiler.  Everytime I see a bug, I always try to add a testcase.  But
sometimes bugs show up only because the IR that is produced by one
specific front-end.  How do you know if you change that code, it will
not break the corner case you just found?  I am against not requiring
testing of the Fortran or Ada or Objective-C or Java front-ends for
middle end or target changes.  They found useful bugs and in some
cases you can add a C testcase for the same issue (I have tried doing
that in some cases).  Yes running only the C testsuite simplifies
testing but that should only be done during the development of the
patch and you should do a full bootstrap and test before submitting.
I usually start a full bootstrap/test before I go bed or leave for the
day so I have the results in the morning.  Most of the time I don't
find issues but when I do, I go back and look at them and look at why
the C testsuite was not testing it.  I think this comes down to how
people develop, and we should not force a development mechanism on
them except when they are ready to submit the patch and only then we
can say how did you test it.

I have a feeling that this thread has gone way off topic and should
start a new one about testing before submitting.

-- Pinski


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