Re: [PATCH] PR other/69006: fix extra newlines after diagnostics (v2)

[David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>]

On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 12:18 +0100, Bernd Schmidt wrote:
> On 01/25/2016 09:13 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> > Here's an updated version of the patch.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> > Instead of testing one particular kind of output via a plugin,
> > this version of the patch adds code to gcc-dg-prune to issue a
> > FAIL for any testcase containing blank lines, with a new
> >    dg-allow-blank-lines-in-output
> > directive for those test cases that legimitately emit blank lines.
> > Examples of the latter include a test using -ftime-report, another
> > using -fdump-tree-cunrolli-details=stderr, and a Fortran test
> > using -fdump-fortran-original.
> 
> Is the =stderr test really necessary, or does it somehow predate the 
> ability to scan dumps?

It was deliberate.

Specifically:  this was in gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/unroll-2.c

Looking backwards through history, it was renamed from
  gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/unroll_1.c
in r219675 (2015-01-15)

It was changed to:
  -fdump-tree-cunrolli-details=stderr
from:
  -fdump-rtl-loop2_unroll=stderr
in r216238 (2014-10-14)

It was changed to:
  -fdump-rtl-loop2_unroll=stderr
from:
  -fdump-rtl-loop2_unroll
in r202260:

    2013-09-04  Teresa Johnson  <tejohnson@google.com>

        * dumpfile.c (dump_finish): Don't close stderr/stdout.

        * testsuite/gcc.dg/unroll_1.c: Test dumping to stderr.

which seems to have been this discussion:
  https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-09/msg00151.html
which was part of this thread:
  https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-08/msg00247.html
  "[PATCH] Convert more passes to new dump framework"

Hence it appears to be deliberate: to give us test coverage for dumping
to stderr, during a rewrite of dumping.


> > OK for trunk in stage 4?  I regard PR 69006 as a regression, and it
> > affects all diagnostics we output (unless caret-printing is
> > disabled).
> 
> Yes, I think so. Ok.

Thanks.

> > +  for (int row = layout.get_first_line ();
> > +       row <= last_line;
> > +       row++)
> 
> While you're fixing the layout here, see if that doesn't all fit on one 
> line.

It does.  Re-running bootstrap&regrtest now with that tweak; I'll commit
it if it passes.

Dave