This is the mail archive of the 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: [PATCH] PR C/12466 -Wold-style-definition incorrectly warnswithellipsises

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote:
>  > On Tue, 30 Sep 2003, Kelley Cook wrote:
>  > > gcc/testsuite:
>  > >        * gcc.dg/Wold-style-definition-1.c: Add in 3 ellipsis
>  > testcases.
>  >
>  > Please create a new testcase.
>  > *Never add stuff to a testcase, particularly not new tests*.
>  > brgds, H-P
> While I normally agree with this, there is a downside if this position
> is taken to an extreme.  It takes longer to run the testsuite if we
> have gillions of tiny little files.
> I think we should make a distinction between regression testcases that
> (used to) crash the compiler and feature testcases that ensure a
> feature, flag or optimization/transformation works properly.

Not as long as they look the same to the observer of test-suite
results, and not as long as the modified test-suite would fail
for an "unenhanced" compiler, where it used to succeed.

> In the latter case, as we modify or enhance the feature in question we
> should update the existing testcase to reflect the new reality.

When you modify the feature, I agree you need to modify the
original test-cases.  But when you enhance the feature you *add
new test-cases* for the enhancement.

> So here I think it's proper to modify the original testcase.

In this case, the original testcase worked as-is (that was the
presumption at the time I replied to this test-suite patch), and
new test-cases were added.  That's the point: new test-cases
should live in a new file.

If the original test-cases needed modification (IIUC, that's
what also happened), well that's a separate change.

brgds, H-P

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