This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Pruning for torture tests?
- From: Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>
- To: IainS <developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk>
- Cc: GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Janis Johnson <janis dot marie dot johnson at gmail dot com>, Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:09:43 +0100
- Subject: Re: Pruning for torture tests?
- References: <5A40FB01-90F9-44FD-B6A1-1982868A27AD@sandoe-acoustics.co.uk> <yddpqphd6b5.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <98CC300F-C8A3-4807-B4A8-4D3A490FC5E9@sandoe-acoustics.co.uk>
Hi Iain,
>> IMO this is the wrong approach. I'd like us to move away from the
>> non-dg testsuites if at all possible.
>
> I personally agree...
>
> ... but when I suggested this for the (relatively small) ObjC set of
> torture tests, it was not greeted enthusiastically...
>
> (the problem voiced, IIRC, is of maintaining audit history of test
> pass/fails)
indeed, and I wouldn't certainly advocate moving the tests around, just
using a different dg-based driver for the torture testsuites.
> ... I'd imagine that this would be amplified 100x for the other torture
> suites.
This would clearly be unacceptable.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University