This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] c/68966 - atomic_fetch_* on atomic_bool not diagnosed
- From: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- To: Martin Sebor <msebor at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Marek Polacek <polacek at redhat dot com>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Gcc Patch List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 16:06:16 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] c/68966 - atomic_fetch_* on atomic_bool not diagnosed
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <567A271B dot 2090403 at gmail dot com> <56877F8B dot 9010000 at redhat dot com> <5689E0F8 dot 5050209 at gmail dot com> <20160104152239 dot GB31604 at redhat dot com> <568B19E8 dot 1020709 at gmail dot com> <20160105105123 dot GD31604 at redhat dot com> <568C0F9C dot 2050505 at gmail dot com> <20160106115001 dot GH31604 at redhat dot com> <568DA56C dot 9030301 at gmail dot com>
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