David Malcolm <dmalc...@redhat.com> writes:
> On Wed, 2025-03-26 at 19:59 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 02:34:43PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for working on this.
>> My python is very limited, so just adding some comments rather
>> than doing patch review.
>>
>> > +COMMON_MISSPELLINGS = {('dg_final', 'dg-final')}
>>
>> Does that catch just dg_final and not say dg_do or dg_error
>> or dg-output_file ?
>
> Unfortunately only the ones I spelled out.
>
>> I'd think a common misspelling would be any replacement of - with
>> _ (maybe also omitting the - altogether).
>
> Maybe a generalization of the regexp to dg[-_][-_a-z]+ or similar, and
> then report things that match the "with underscores" regexp but not the
> "without underscores" regexp.
I don't think we have any valid "user-facing" dg_ directives (there are
some dg_ matches in .exp files though).
May be worth having two tiers here, I guess: known mismatch and also
just suspicious _ even when we can't figure out intent. But not that
important?
>
>
>> And I think Sam fixed
>> some dg-compile or dg-run misspellings of dg-do compile or dg-do run.
>>
>> Does it have a list of valid dg-* directives and diagnose if it
>> sees dg-invalid-directive?
>
> It doesn't; that's a good idea.
Right, we can extend it for 'dg-do known-actions' as well.
>
> Dave
