This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFA] ObjC testsuite use simple NSConstantString implementation
- From: Nicola Pero <nicola at brainstorm dot co dot uk>
- To: Ziemowit Laski <zlaski at apple dot com>
- Cc: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>, David Ayers <d dot ayers at inode dot at>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org Patches" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 00:06:46 +0100 (BST)
- Subject: Re: [RFA] ObjC testsuite use simple NSConstantString implementation
> >>> this is supplies the testsuite with a simple NSConstantString
> >>> implementation to be used for the Apple ObjC runtime tests. This is
> >>> an alternative patch in reference to the following thread:
> >>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-06/msg00130.html
> >> I must apologize for not being aware that the Darwin distribution
> >> indeed does not bundle Foundation with it. :-)
> >> Would conditionalizing '-framework Foundation' on '--disable-libobjc'
> >> (_and_ Darwinness, of course) be a good compromise?
> > Not really because again this still does not work on the Darwin OS
> > which does
> > not have the Foundation framework and if we are testing the
> > NeXT^wApple's runtime.
> Thing is, it is really good to be able to exercise '-framework', as
> well as test NSConstantStrings in their "natural environment". :-)
This (the need for testing -framework) is indeed a very good point, but
I'd say the right approach is to add separate tests for -framework then.
David's patches make sure that you can test the constant string
functionality with the Apple runtime no matter what platform you're on and
no matter what external libraries you have (you could test them even on
Linux, as soon as you are able to run the Apple runtime on Linux), which
strike me as obviously the best solution.
If you want to test -framework, what about adding new separate tests for
it ? I imagine we'd be all happy to see more tests (I'd definitely be).