This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: cpp0x test suite PASS/FAIL
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: BELBACHIR Selim <selim dot belbachir at fr dot thalesgroup dot com>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 17:21:51 +0000
- Subject: Re: cpp0x test suite PASS/FAIL
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20237_1386691059_52A739F3_20237_16437_1_9C88BF562A27AA41B242B2780441926E210CAD347A at THSONEA01CMS05P dot one dot grp>
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, BELBACHIR Selim wrote:
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C -std=c++11 std (test for errors, line 3)
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C -std=c++11 auto (test for errors, line 3)
> FAIL: g++.dg/cpp0x/auto27.C -std=c++11 no type (test for errors, line 3)
That means that the desired result is an error message on that line, and
either there was no such error message or the error message did not match
what the testcase expected.
> Should I ignore the FAILs when the comment contains '(test for errors'
> and consider that those tests are parts of a larger test with comment
> '(test for excess errors' ?
No, FAILs indicate a bug in either the compiler or the testcase (or in
your test environment, etc.); don't ignore them.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com