Results for 9.0.0 20180823 (experimental) [trunk revision 263820] (GCC) libstdc++ testsuite on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu

[Jonathan Wakely]

On 24/08/18 12:30 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>On 24/08/18 06:59 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>Running target unix/-std=gnu++17/-D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG
>>XPASS: 21_strings/basic_string_view/element_access/char/2.cc execution test
>>XPASS: 21_strings/basic_string_view/element_access/wchar_t/2.cc execution test
>>FAIL: 23_containers/vector/debug/invalidation/1.cc (test for excess errors)
>>UNRESOLVED: 23_containers/vector/debug/invalidation/1.cc compilation failed to produce executable
>>FAIL: 23_containers/vector/debug/invalidation/2.cc (test for excess errors)
>>UNRESOLVED: 23_containers/vector/debug/invalidation/2.cc compilation failed to produce executable
>>FAIL: 23_containers/vector/debug/invalidation/3.cc (test for excess errors)
>>UNRESOLVED: 23_containers/vector/debug/invalidation/3.cc compilation failed to produce executable
>>FAIL: 23_containers/vector/debug/invalidation/4.cc (test for excess errors)
>>UNRESOLVED: 23_containers/vector/debug/invalidation/4.cc compilation failed to produce executable
>
>I think these ones are my fault, I'll fix them.

Done with r263839.

>>FAIL: 25_algorithms/max/constexpr.cc (test for excess errors)
>>FAIL: 25_algorithms/max_element/constexpr.cc (test for excess errors)
>>FAIL: 25_algorithms/min/constexpr.cc (test for excess errors)
>>FAIL: 25_algorithms/min_element/constexpr.cc (test for excess errors)
>>FAIL: 25_algorithms/minmax/constexpr.cc (test for excess errors)
>>FAIL: 25_algorithms/minmax_element/constexpr.cc (test for excess errors)
>>XPASS: experimental/string_view/element_access/char/2.cc execution test
>>XPASS: experimental/string_view/element_access/wchar_t/2.cc execution test
>
>These failures are known and have been present for a while.
>
>But ...
>
>>FAIL: ext/profile/mutex_extensions_neg.cc (test for excess errors)
>>FAIL: libstdc++-prettyprinters/80276.cc whatis p1
>
>I think the pretty printers used to work for debug mode, so
>something's changed.

Well they fail the same way in gcc-7-branch, so maybe not.

Should the printer tests have { dg-require-normal-mode "" } added?