On 1 February 2015 at 18:49, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > On Jan 31, 2015, at 1:55 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot....@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> What about the -Wcomment question? > > I don’t consider it linked in anyway to the patch at hand. I’m not a big fan > of the default flags being much different than the flags the user normally > sees. That said, would be nice to avoid this issue. The best way forward I > can think of would be a wholesale change to // style comments in the test > suite for all test cases that accept that language. // is standard C and > C++, and by convention, I think they are fine in Objective-C and Obective-C++.
I won't do a wholesale change to C++-style comments in the testsuite (where applicable), that's too time-consuming. Since you OKed the patch cited below, i suggest i apply those hunks of the manual patch that are still relevant since i think they make sense regardless of the auto-wipe dumpfiles stuff going in or not. > >> And can you help with the two ??? maybe? > > Which type of help? In the last posted patch https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-12/msg01749.html there is only one question left: + foreach src $testcases { + set basename [file tail $src] + if { $ltrans != "" } { + # ??? should we use upvar 1 output_file instead of this (dup ?) + set stem [file rootname $basename] + set basename_ext [file extension $basename] + if {$basename_ext != ""} { + regsub -- {^.*\.} $basename_ext {} basename_ext + } + lappend tfiles "$stem.{$basename_ext,exe}" + unset basename_ext + } else { + lappend tfiles $basename + } + } I wasn't sure if upvar 1 output_file would globally work? WDYT? PS: IIRC someone from codesourcery meanwhile fixed the pch test objects leftovers so the * lib/dg-pch.exp(pch-init): Remove pch-check objects. is obsolete by now.
