[PATCH] gfortran testsuite: Remove unit-files in files having open-statements, PR116701

[Jerry D]

On 9/24/24 5:46 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> Thanks for the review!
> 
>> Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:10:27 -0700
>> Cc: Jerry D <jvdelisle2@gmail.com>
>> From: Jerry D <jvdelisle2@gmail.com>
>> On 9/23/24 11:21 PM, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
>>> I hope the inclusion of gfortran-dg.exp in
>>> fortran-torture.exp is not controversial, but there's no
>>> fortran-specific testsuite file common to dg and
>>> classic-torture and also this placement is still in the
>>> "Utility routines" section of gfortran-dg.exp.  (BTW, the C
>>> torture-tests changed to the dg framework some time ago - no
>>> more .x-files there and dg-directives actually work - there
>>> are some in gfortran.fortran-torture that are apparently
>>> ignored!)
>>
>> Explain this change of including gfortran-dg.exp in fortran-torture.exp.
> 
> I need to put the new proc in a file, to be used by both dg
> and classic-torture.  I picked among the untility-carrying
> files gfortran-dg.exp, as it looked more fitting than
> e.g. fortran-modules.exp.  Since it's not previously
> included there, I included that file in fortran-torture.exp.
> 
> By including that file, not just the new proc
> gfortran-dg-rmunits but also the other procs in that file
> are available.  Since they don't collide with the
> fortran-torture machinery, that should have no effect.
> 
>> What does it mean in the case I do 'make -k -j4 check-fortran'? Does
>> gfortran-dg-exp get performed twice?
> 
> (I assume you mean "are the gfortran.dg tests run twice" as
> other interpretations make less sense to me.)
> 

Your interpretation of my typo is correct.  Along with Andre I like auto 
cleanup. On new test cases we try to have them self delete whether they 
pass or fail.

So your changes are ok with me.

> No.
> 
>> Forgive my ignorance of the
>> testsuite incantations.
> 
> There's nothing but load_lib and proc definitions in
> gfortran-dg.exp, specifically no "top-level code" running
> tests like execute.exp or dg.exp, so including it should
> have no such effect...but I see that the files it include
> *do* have top-level code (setting global variables for use
> by the testsuite machinery, *not* running tests).
> 
> Perhaps I should ignore that misnomer and put
> gfortran-dg-rmunits in fortran-modules.exp in order to put
> pollution worries to rest.  After all, that file already has
> the utility proc igrep, used in gfortran-dg-rmunits.  So,
> new version coming up.
> 
> brgds, H-P