Re PR 43512 and Re: PING#2 Re: PING *objc, NeXT runtime, testsuite changes*

[Janis Johnson]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 1:51 PM, IainS <developer@sandoe-acoustics.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On 24 Mar 2010, at 22:57, Janis Johnson wrote:
>
>>> I can do that.
>
> In view of the temporary extra fails [43512] showing on linux I've gone as
> quickly as possible ...
> ... (although, I'm not sure whether I regard the fails as real regressions -
> or simply that the tests were not being carried out correctly before)
>
> Part 2 resolves those - and does the main bulk of the solution to PR35165.
>
> I'm attaching a formatted changelog ... it's lengthly and repetitive.  I
> hope it's correctly stylistically.
>
> Essentially, as a reprise:
>
> on all targets gnu-runtime is tested
> on darwin gnu and NeXT runtimes are tested -this is now done in two loops in
> objc.dg and obj-c++.dg with the runtime mentioned specifically rather than
> relying on defaults...
>
> The ABI differences in post Darwin9 systems are wrapped up in a series of
> new headers in a common directory shared between ObjC and ObjC++.
> This includes an updated version of next-mapping.h (moved from
> objc/execute/next_mapping and updated).
>
> ---
>
> A medium-term goal should be to migrate all the small sections of code  that
> cater for those differences into next-mapping.h.
> However, that is too long a job for now - and would get in the way of
> solving the basic problem: vix: we can't see the wood for the trees -
> because of the cruft of ABI-related error messages.
>
> I am attaching a tar file with the new files - and pointing out that
> objc/execute/next_mapping.h should be deleted -- these kind of changes are a
> little more difficult to embed in a diff.
>
> ===
>
> There's more that could be done to reduce the spurious messages for ObjC++ -
> but it's getting to be a large patch anyway.
>
> IMO any errors that remain (certainly at m32) should be considered genuine
> 'bugs' and not incidental fall-out from Darwin's ObjC ABI change.
>
> The changes show no regressions on the platforms I have access to [darwin,
> pc-linux] .. in fact, I've tried hard to make them darwin-local...
>
> ===
>
> There is one piece of weirditude that causes a test to pass on linux only if
> the -fnext-runtime is left in the test. [objc.dg/encode-1.m].
> This is because the -fgnu-runtime flag causes the compiler to find the
> requisite headers - but the -fnext-runtime flag causes it to generate the
> correct code.
> I think this is probably a completely anomalous historical test situation -
> there is no reason for a linux compiler to generate mach-o compliant code...
>
> However, if I "correct" it - it will cause a 'regression' on Linux.... so it
> needs looking at later;
> I've preserved the status-quo to minimize things people need to consider.
>
> hope this OK now..
> Iain

Yes, I checked it in after running the tests with the patch on powerpc64-linux.
Thanks for sticking with this.

Janis