On 01/27/2011 05:20 PM, Daily, Jeff A wrote: > In a nutshell, I've written a drop-in replacement of another tool and would > like to test that it functions identical to the original. All you need to > know about these tools is that they take as input one or more binary files > and produce a single binary file. Of course they do more than that, but the > details aren't important. Also, in order to compare the binary output files, > I've written another tool "pgcmp". > > The input files are stored in a data directory. The number of files in this > directory can change. It'd like to perform the same tests against every > input file in the data directory, but have the ability to skep files which > might not meet some sort of criteria. Something like: > > AT_SETUP([testing $file, no arguments]) > for file in $datadir/* > do > AS_IF([bad $file], [continue]) > AT_CHECK([replacement $file -o replacement.out]) > AT_CHECK([original $file -o original.out]) > AT_CHECK([pgcmp replacement.out original.out]) > done > AT_CLEANUP > > Is this allowed/okay?
Absolutely! AT_CHECK is just a macro that expands to shell code; it is perfectly legal to surround it by additional shell code that adds conditions on whether the AT_CHECK will be reached. -- Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com +1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
