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: [PATCH] c/68966 - atomic_fetch_* on atomic_bool not diagnosed


On Jan 6, 2016, at 3:38 PM, Martin Sebor <msebor@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>> 2016-01-04  Martin Sebor  <msebor@redhat.com>
>>> 
>>> 	PR c/68966
>>> 	* gcc.dg/atomic-fetch-bool.c: New test.
>>> 	* gcc.dg/sync-fetch-bool.c: Same.
>> 
>> So the tradition is to repeat "New test." rather than to say "Same."
> 
> Can we try not to make the rules any more rigid than they need
> to be?  As we just discussed, following the required formatting
> rules is error-prone and time-consuming enough.  GCC's own
> Coding Conventions doesn't even require ChangeLog entries for
> new tests (https://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#ChangeLogs).
> People have been adding them and that's just fine with me, but
> I can't discern any established convention when it comes to the
> comment when a new test is being added.  I see examples of "New
> test" or "New file" followed by "Likewise" or "Ditto" as well
> as "New test" followed by "Same". I see no point in adding yet
> another hoop for people to have to remember to jump through.

And I thought it was Likewise.  :-)

$ grep Same *ChangeLog* | wc -l
    3938
$ grep Likewise *ChangeLog* | wc -l
   69444


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