Hi Alan,
>> I'm still not really comfortable with those target lists; they tend to
>> artificially exclude tests on targets where they are perfectly capable
>> of running. At least with the comments added, it's better than before
>> with no explanation whatsoever. Perhaps Mike can weigh in here?
>
> Well, it's been awhile, but on further reflection - my feeling is that we
> should be dropping the target lists here too. Maybe we end up introducing a
> dg-skip-if that grows over time, but it'd have to grow quite a bit to reach
> the size of the dg-do target we'd otherwise have...
It's not even necessary to use dg-skip if the scan-rtl-dump fails. You
can just add an xfail there, which has the advantage that you do notice
if the test starts to pass e.g. due to changes in a target.
> However I am a bit wary about dropping the dg-do target constraint just as
> we are nearing a release! So if we were to keep the whitelist approach,
> your patch looks good to me, and I'd be happy if that were committed.
Let's give others a day or two to comment: if nobody is in favour of the
more agressive approach, I'll commit my patch.
Thanks.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
