This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: libstdc++ test suite still drives machine into swap
- To: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: libstdc++ test suite still drives machine into swap
- From: Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 15:24:17 -0400
- Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>, Zack Weinberg <zackw at stanford dot edu>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <email@example.com> <Pine.SOL.3.91.1010731225616.16898Bfirstname.lastname@example.org>
On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 10:59:52PM -0700, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> I think Zack and I will just have to disagree on what constitutes
> a testsuite. For me, it includes pathological edge cases as defined in
> the standard. He thinks they are tested elsewhere, I disagree.
I agree with you here; testing pathological cases is Good.
> Since this
> topic seems to be activated by cron jobs every 3 months,
Yes, my "email some reminders" cron table entry fired Sunday night.
I'm not joking....
> Phil please don't remove these tests.
But I disagree with you here. :-) My patch just makes insert.cc do the
same thing that ctor_copy_dtor.cc is already doing. All the tests are
still there. I'll be the first one to suggest re-pathologicalizing (!) the
size function arguments once we can make DG force the limits properly.
Having the machine kill itself for 5-15 minutes on every test run is
just annoying. It does however force us to take a typing break.
I could also work up a patch to artificially limit max_size()/npos.
That could conceivably be useful to users in any case.
Would I had phrases that are not known, utterances that are strange, in
new language that has not been used, free from repetition, not an utterance
which has grown stale, which men of old have spoken.
- anonymous Egyptian scribe, c.1700 BC