Re: testsuite, simulators, and argv[0]

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

Paul Brook wrote:

> 	  foo (argv[0]);

> I'd say it's a broken test then.

It's a broken program, in full generality.

DJ, you could fix this either by checking argc != 0 in the test, or by
adding an effective-target condition that the test be run only on
targets that pass argv[0].  I think the latter choice is pedantically
more accurate -- as we will then not claim that the test passes on such
targets.

However, I think an even better fix is just to hard-code the string and
make it volatile.  Presumably, the use of argv[0] here is just to keep
the compiler from optimizing the program away.  So, I suggest doing
something like:

  volatile char *x = "pr36321.exe";

and passing x to the function, instead of argv[0].

A patch along those lines is pre-approved.

Thanks,

-- 
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
mark@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x713