On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com> wrote: > Patch itself looks obvious to me, but I don't understand the > general_testcases.cc idea, do we have something similar elsewhere in library > or compiler?!? I would say, let's just add a normal testcase and close the > bug (mainline and branch I suppose)
I've discussed this with Jon, but that thread unintentionally went out of the mailing list. Here's the discussion: On 28/06/14 10:06 -0700, Tim Shen wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 2:40 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> I think that would be very good for libstdc++, however as the regex >> tests are already the slowest part of the entire testsuite (due to the >> very slow compile times of the <regex> code) I'd be somewhat reluctant >> to add tons of new tests to every run. Maybe as an optional >> check-regex target though. > > > I'd like to merge testcases to several huge files (char, wchar_t, > dg-do compile, locales, etc.) to (greatly) reduce duplicated <regex> > compilation. > > We do not really care the fine-grained test report, do we? We hope > them all PASS. Yes. As long as it's possible to tell which part of test fails when something doesn't pass, that's fine. -- Regards, Tim Shen
