On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Ben Elliston <b...@air.net.au> wrote:
> Hi Rainer
>
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 10:51:51AM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
>
> > While reviewing the GCC testsuite, I noticed that practically every
> > testsuite driver has the equivalent of
> >
> > load_lib ${tool}-dg.exp
> >
> > While ${tool}.exp is automatically loaded by the framework, this file
> > needs to be loaded separately.
> >
> > It is sort of documented in dg.exp:
> >
> > # The normal way to write a testsuite is to have a .exp file containing:
> > #
> > # load_lib ${tool}-dg.exp
> > # dg-init
> > # dg-runtest [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/foo*]] ...
> > # dg-finish
> >
> > but so far I've no idea what the point is and how to decide what goes
> > into ${tool}.exp and what into ${tool}-dg.exp. Unless there is a good
> > reason for this separation, I plan to go over the GCC testsuites and
> > remove the explicit load_lib and do that in the corresponding
> > ${tool}.exp until both are merged.
>
> I don't know. I think the best person to ask this question is Doug
> Evan. Doug, can you remember? :-)
>
> Ben
>
I can only guess, but I suspect the confusion here is because one needs to
remember that "dg" is just one way to write a gcc dejagnu test.
Not every test uses dg, and when dg was added to the gcc testsuite I
certainly wasn't going to load dg stuff in ${tool}.exp.
For reference sake,
I think a simple rule of thumb for ${tool}.exp vs ${tool}-dg.exp is if it's
dg-specific put it in the latter.
But no matter,
I have no opinion on what one does today.
_______________________________________________
DejaGnu mailing list
DejaGnu@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dejagnu
